F/A rest
04-04-2016, 02:35 PM
#4
Junior Senior
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: Whiskey Papa
Posts: 2,851
Love the "therapy wand" idea.
. 
04-04-2016, 03:01 PM
#8
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2014
Position: Downward-Facing Dog Pose
Posts: 1,537
I usually give the aisle pros a hard time, but this really is just total horse manure...
This is so pathetically idiotic and asinine it makes my head hurt. According to this woman's logic, the "rule" for pilots "makes sense" and is thus Constitutional (nevermind that it "interfered with" the pilots CBs in place at the time). But the opposite is true as regards FAs!
"Freddy" Krunkle did a p**s poor job of pointing this vapid stupidity out in his "piece".
And since I'm at it, Congress really did drop the ball in singling out pilots and fatigue, leaving FA's out of the picture. Then again, Congress is so fumble prone as to make it a wonder gov't works at all.
the airline industry argues that the rules setting a 10-hour rest period for the flight crew makes sense because pilot fatigue increases the risk of making an error that could trigger a catastrophic accident. That’s not the case with the cabin crew, the airlines say.
Melanie Hinton, a spokeswoman for Airlines for America, said that such a rule could be “potentially unconstitutional” because it would interfere with collective bargaining agreements in place between airlines and the flight attendant unions.
Melanie Hinton, a spokeswoman for Airlines for America, said that such a rule could be “potentially unconstitutional” because it would interfere with collective bargaining agreements in place between airlines and the flight attendant unions.
This is so pathetically idiotic and asinine it makes my head hurt. According to this woman's logic, the "rule" for pilots "makes sense" and is thus Constitutional (nevermind that it "interfered with" the pilots CBs in place at the time). But the opposite is true as regards FAs!
"Freddy" Krunkle did a p**s poor job of pointing this vapid stupidity out in his "piece".
And since I'm at it, Congress really did drop the ball in singling out pilots and fatigue, leaving FA's out of the picture. Then again, Congress is so fumble prone as to make it a wonder gov't works at all.
04-04-2016, 03:30 PM
#9
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 40,016
Well, being reasonable...history of is full of pilot-induced catastrophes, some of which clearly could have been avoided if the pilots were rested and alert.
It's possible to envision a scenario where a tired FA could make a mistake which would have fatal consequences for the public, but it would be much, much harder to get there than with pilots.
The catch is that catastrophic consequences (ala colgan) was the genesis and justification that got the pax pilot rules changed. But it's harder to make that same justification for FA's (and cargo pilots), so it's an uphill battle.
It's possible to envision a scenario where a tired FA could make a mistake which would have fatal consequences for the public, but it would be much, much harder to get there than with pilots.
The catch is that catastrophic consequences (ala colgan) was the genesis and justification that got the pax pilot rules changed. But it's harder to make that same justification for FA's (and cargo pilots), so it's an uphill battle.
04-04-2016, 03:48 PM
#10
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2014
Position: Downward-Facing Dog Pose
Posts: 1,537
That is a valid, reasonable argument, Rick, however much I think FAs deserve the same rest rules as pilots.
Ms. Airline Industry Spokeswoman argues changing the rest rule for FAs is "potentially unConstitutional", which I think you would agree is a ridiculous argument to attempt.
brk brk
BTW, I got your PM. Mssg received and copy that.
Ms. Airline Industry Spokeswoman argues changing the rest rule for FAs is "potentially unConstitutional", which I think you would agree is a ridiculous argument to attempt.
brk brk
BTW, I got your PM. Mssg received and copy that.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
