Scheduling and the FAA

[usfa304]

Just a thought here, but is it unrealistic to make a distinction between the language of 'on call' vs 'on duty'? This mandate will severly change the dynamics of our trade board and all who use it, both for picking up and dropping trips.

 

[PITbull]

Abused the rule? How aout a F/A that scheduled themselves for an ETB trip over their OFF days - were they also abusing the rule?

This is going to basically eliminate that scenario. RSV's are going to be severely limited in legally picking up an ETB trip, and still be legal for their duty stretch. It is also going to be a sea change for commuting RSV's - there will be more groups of OFF and INV days with less days in each group.

Also, any flexibility we might have had with regard to moving and/or swapping of OFF/INV days will be similarly curtailed. The system will certainly survive the implementation of the rule, and I'm sure the union and the company will try to make it as seamless as possible, but as one who has worked in both pilot and f/a scheduling, it is certainly going to have an effect on schedule flexibility and the ETB.

If the RSVs can't pick up ETB, as it has been in the past with the smaller bases, many of the f/as will now be able to find other part time work to make up the difference. Lineholders will have a more difficult time dumping their trips. ETB has only been around for a little over a year for U East. It was a great idea for droping trips, but I never thought it was a great thing for our labor group. Giving up your days off and add more days leaving home just to make the money the company TOOK from the group during BK was not appealing as a new life style. Way I see this issue, its going to hurt the company MUCH more than the f/as and pilots.


Seems to me the airlines are going to HAVE to "recall" and then start doing much more hiring...sea change, indeedy. The roster is about to get huge.B)

Yup. Dougie is going to have to open up the "bank".

Finally, there may now be an industry wide demand for pilots and f/as.

 

[PITbull]

Yeah, do you know who this is really truly gonna hurt? The blockholder trying to drop that baby on the ETB. Won't be that many reserves able to p/u the trip now..... Those blockholders who got po'd will see how lucky they were to have the reserves picking the trips up. It will blow for those that choose the ETB on reserve to have a somewhat better paycheck. It will still be possible though. Just not as much.

With the LTO system, the commpany basically owned the reserves all month. With the FAA enforcing this regulation, the company won't be able to fly the reserves by keeping them on call for longer than 3 days if they want to assign them a 4 day trip. There won't be enough f/as for the schedule.Its going to hurt the airline companies MORE than labor. Your number is going to move way up on the f/a roster in the near future.

 

[Career Reserve]

PitBull I believe you are right.
In smaller bases like Pit the reserves really couldn't pick up ETB's. The blockholders gave them to their friends, whom I might add "Bid" reserve to pick them up.
Now in a large base like Philly (which the majority are commuters)we may see alot of "inadequate coverage"
For reserves please refer to section 11; page 11-7 #4 when coverage is inadequate through page 11-13 to help you understand a section of the contract rarely used.
Actually take time and read all of Section 11. For those without hardcopies they are available in some crewrooms or you can view it online.

 

[Travelpro72]

Like Pitbull was saying is that the reserves SHOULD NOT HAVE TO RELY ON ETB time to make ends meet. So now they will have to probably add flight attendants to cover trips. It will most likely prove to be a mess. Now that the company will HAVE to follow this FAR. Yes the union should have figured out that this was an issue due to the fact that the pilots were slitting for the FAR ALL THE TIME. The government was the ones though that claimed they were looking into it for years upon years. Whether the union fought it or made a stink in any way does not mean the company would have changed how they operated. The company basically does what it wants. Wanna grieve it? go ahead. They will continue to violate until it is passed in the workgroups favor. So while I'm sorry for those that do use the ETB to make ends meet, right is right about the rules. Now we need a better reserve system as quick as YESTERDAY! ! ! !

 

[Career Reserve]

Now we need a better reserve system as quick as YESTERDAY! ! ! !

No, more like last year!

 

[Career Reserve]

FAA TO ENFORCE 24/7 REST FOR RESERVES AT US AIRWAYS

This issue has gone back and forth between the FAA, the AFA, other Flight Attendant unions and various airlines for over a decade. On September 12, 2006 the FAA met with the Company and AFA MEC President, Mike Flores and directed the Company to comply with the FAR "expeditiously". The FAA cited numerous complaints from US Airways Flight Attendants as a partial explanation for their focus on US Airways. Within the past two years the FAA has required other airlines, notably Northwest and American, to comply with the FAR.

Isn't this just a shame that the flight attendants had to go to the FAA and complain that the company & union could not resolve this issue.. "In-house"?

 

[PITbull]

This issue will cost airlines tens of millions of $$; maybe more. If the unions would have taken it to arbitration, they would have lost. There is no arbitrator that would rule in the favor of the crew rest. The company would have argued (as they did with the unions) that being "on call" is not the same as a "duty period".

This had to be resolved at the FAA level.

 

[Happy_People]

Well if you guys are so overstaffed on the east and want to fly and make a check. Why don't you ask that lineholders be able to drop their trips into open time based on staffing so the reserves can fly... win -win for everyone. Like we do on the west.

 

[PITbull]

Well if you guys are so overstaffed on the east and want to fly and make a check. Why don't you ask that lineholders be able to drop their trips into open time based on staffing so the reserves can fly... win -win for everyone. Like we do on the west.

Its not an overstaffing situation. Its quite the opposite. I can see the company coming to the MECs to renegotiate the lineholder's ability to drop down to 50 hours in order for the company not to run short of f/as.

If I were on the MEC, I'd be negotiating anything for increases in wages across the board. The way I see this is the UNIONS are in a major leverage position. Hope they even recognize this and don't pass it up when the \company approaches...and they will come.

 

[Nebucanezzar]

Just a thought here, but is it unrealistic to make a distinction between the language of 'on call' vs 'on duty'? This mandate will severly change the dynamics of our trade board and all who use it, both for picking up and dropping trips.

English? Is that you?...is that Murphy? Welcome!

 

[PITbull]

Just a thought here, but is it unrealistic to make a distinction between the language of 'on call' vs 'on duty'? This mandate will severly change the dynamics of our trade board and all who use it, both for picking up and dropping trips.

No. There is no distinction. "On Duty" for reserves starts at midnight. They are "on duty" until they receive a trip, OR, go "off duty" when their "days off" commence.

 

[ilg30/7]

If the RSVs can't pick up ETB, as it has been in the past with the smaller bases, many of the f/as will now be able to find other part time work to make up the difference. Lineholders will have a more difficult time dumping their trips. ETB has only been around for a little over a year for U East. It was a great idea for droping trips, but I never thought it was a great thing for our labor group. Giving up your days off and add more days leaving home just to make the money the company TOOK from the group during BK was not appealing as a new life style. Way I see this issue, its going to hurt the company MUCH more than the f/as and pilots.
Seems to me the airlines are going to HAVE to "recall" and then start doing much more hiring...sea change, indeedy. The roster is about to get huge.B)

Yup. Dougie is going to have to open up the "bank".

Finally, there may now be an industry wide demand for pilots and f/as.

I simply do not see this happening. As a quick scan of these boards will attest, reserves are not getting there time in as is. Put simply, we are overstaffed. This ruling will result in a few more split trips and things of that nature, and may result in some localized headaches in the smaller bases (although those trips tend to be 1 and 2 days anyway)and crunches during holiday periods, but its not going to result in such a huge ineffeciency that we cannot staff the current schedule with the current workforce.

When this regulation went into effect for the pilots in '99, it did not result in huge numbers of pilot hires, and they were staffed far more tightly than the current f/a situation. You might be right if the airline returns to growth mode - we will have to hire / recall sooner than we otherwise would have, but even that is going to be marginal, IMHO.

 

[Bear96]

If I were on the MEC, I'd be negotiating anything for increases in wages across the board. The way I see this is the UNIONS are in a major leverage position. Hope they even recognize this and don't pass it up when the \company approaches...and they will come.

PITbull, in an earlier post on this thread you said this would create a need for more F/As. In other words, it would take more F/As (and therefore more payroll $) to fly the same schedule, which is more inefficient and leaves less money for other things, like raises.

Now you are saying it will also lead to more leverage to increase wages?

Sometimes your business sense puzzles me.

 

[hula-flyguy]

Another area of concern will be last leg swaps. If a rsv is nonreving into base on an off day and will be on duty for 6, she will NOT be permitted to fly somebody's last leg for them. That's gonna hurt too. A lot of folks enjoy that little perk that will be taken away.