AeroBlogger

Posts Tagged ‘unions’

Estimated reading time for this article: 2 minutes or less

Press Release:

US Airways (NYSE: LCC) today announced that it has reached a tentative agreement on a new collective bargaining agreement with the Association of Flight Attendants (AFA), which represents the airline’s 6,700 mainline flight attendants. Details of the agreement will be made available by AFA.

“We are very pleased to have reached a tentative agreement with the AFA and thank the union leadership for their dedication in support of our flight attendants,” said Doug Parker, Chairman and CEO.

“We want to express our appreciation to the National Mediation Board and our mediator Jim MacKenzie, for his instrumental role in helping both parties reach a successful conclusion to our mediated negotiation sessions,” said Al Hemenway, US Airways’ vice president, Labor. “I would also like to thank the leadership of AFA for their hard work in helping us reach a tentative agreement with our exceptional flight attendants.”

The AFA Master Executive Counsel’s (MEC’s) must first approve the tentative agreement before it can be sent to its members for consideration. This first step is expected to take place in the coming weeks. The tentative agreement would cover the airline’s 6,700 mainline flight attendants, who are based in US Airways’ three hub cities of Phoenix, Philadelphia, Charlotte, N.C., and in its Washington D.C. focus city.

6 full years after US Airways and America West merged, the flight attendants have finally gotten a joint contract. This will give US Airways more scheduling flexibility, and will presumably get the flight attendants their first pay raise in 9 years. It’ll certainly be an interesting analysis to see what the terms of the deal are…
Perhaps the pilots will be next?

Estimated reading time for this article: 3 – 4 minutes

On Wednesday, I wrote about the new anti-fatigue rules that the FAA has established. A major loophole in the new rules is that cargo carriers are exempt. As I wrote:

Interestingly, cargo pilots are exempted from the new rules. Cargo companies argued that their pilots have gotten used to flying during the night, and that applying the rule would mean that their pilots could not sleep at night and fly by day as much, which would be disruptive. However, Robert Travis, the president of UPS’ union, did not agree with his company’s position:

“Giving air cargo carriers the choice to opt-in to new pilot rest rules makes a much sense as allowing truckers to ‘opt-out’ of drunk driving laws,” he said.

UPS Logo; Source: UPS

Yesterday, UPS’ pilots Union, the Independent Pilots Association, announced that they have filed a lawsuit against the FAA regarding the exemption. They argue about “procedural irregularities, “lack of evidence, ” and “internal inconsistency” in their lawsuit. However, all of that isn’t the fundamental point behind this exemption.

Basically what the FAA has declared is that cargo is less important than passengers. Their argument against requiring cargo carriers to comply with the new rules is that it would force cargo carriers to reduce the flying time of pilots. They decided that the estimated cost of compliance, over $200 million, is not worth the safety advantages. It is okay with them if a couple cargo planes go down, and some cargo pilots lose their lives, as long as $200 million is saved. Personally, I think that this is very disconcerting.

UPS Boeing 767; Source: UPS

A similar argument was occurring in 1996. It had been mandated that all passenger aircraft be equipped with TCAS, Traffic Collision Avoidance System. This system warned pilots when there was another aircraft on collision course, and directed what steps should be taken. Cargo carriers were exempt from this rule. Then, in November of that year, there was a major collision in India. A fly-by-night cargo/charter airliner, not equipped with TCAS, collided with a Boeing 747. There were no survivors. After this event, all cargo aircraft were equipped with TCAS as well. However, it underlined the point that just because there are only a few people aboard a flight, that doesn’t mean that a crash won’t have consequences on other aircraft or people on the ground. The FAA seems to have decided the lives of a few pilots is not worth the extra cost. What the FAA hasn’t seemed to take into account is that these few pilots are in control of a massive chunk of metal hurtling around at hundreds of miles per hour.

UPS 747-400; Source: UPS

UPS has played its part well. After heavy lobbying to get the exemption, they have continued to talk about how the cargo industry is “different” and needs less stringent rules:

“One size has never fit all when it comes to crew rest regulations,” said Norman Black, a spokesman for Atlanta-based UPS, in a statement. “UPS believes the FAA has recognized this fact and made an appropriate decision in its new rule.”

What is even more amusing is that the FAA is saying that these rules are “opt-in” and they hope that cargo airlines choose to adopt them even if they aren’t legally required. The idea that they could think the companies which just spent money, time, and effort lobbying for an exemption are going to suddenly follow the rules anyway is ludicrous.

I wish the UPS pilots well in their lawsuit, and hope that they win. After all, a win for the pilots is a win for safer skies.

Estimated reading time for this article: 3 – 4 minutes

The FAA issued a new set of pilot fatigue rules just now.

The new rules come in the aftermath of the Colgan Air crash in February 2009. The investigation into that crash, which killed 50 people, found that one of the causes of the crash was that both pilots were dangerously fatigued. Since then, the FAA has been working on new pilot fatigue rules to replace the existing rules. Dating back to the 1960s, the existing rules were full of loopholes, such as the fact that carriers could extend work days if a pilot is flying a repositioning flight, often called “ferry” flights.

The new rules take into account recent studies on fatigue. Flight-duty times range from 9 to 14 hours, taking into account the number of flight segments, the number of time zones crossed, and the time of day when the duty day begins. Unlike previous rules, the new rules don’t take make distinctions between international, domestic, and repositioning flights. In addition, the new rules clarify and standardize that flight-duty time starts when a pilot reports for duty, and ends when the pilot parks their last flight before beginning a rest period. Flight time limits of 8 or 9 hours, depending on the start time of the pilot’s duty day have been put into place as well.

Rest period rules have also been overhauled. The new rules set a 10 hour minimum rest period prior to the flight duty period, compared to an 8 hour rest period before. Within the 10 hours, pilots must have the opportunity to sleep for at least 8 uninterrupted hours. The second part of the rule was put into place to ensure that pilots actually get rest instead of spending their rest period being shuttled to crew rest hotels, eating, or taking a shower.

The new rules set cumulative flight duty and flight time limits. There are now weekly and 28-day limits that have been put into place regarding how much time a pilot can be assigned flight duty. There are also now 28-day and annual limits on flight time. The new rules also require that pilots have at least 30 consecutive hours free from duty per week, 5/4 of the old rules.

Finally, the new rule attempts to ensure that pilots are fit for duty. The Colgan co-pilot was fatigued from commuting on a transcontinental flight the night before, and therefore unfit for duty. I personally don’t feel that this part of the new rules go far enough. They simply require pilots to affirm that they are fit for duty before beginning a flight. For the airlines today, which increasingly keep hire less pilots to keep costs down, pressure will be there for pilots to fly regardless of their fitness for duty. A PBS Frontline Documentary on the Colgan crash highlights that many regional pilots feel pressured to fly even when they don’t feel fit to. with threats over job security and pay being used to intimidate. These new rules don’t change any of that.

The new rules will be expensive for the airlines to comply with. Throughout the process of creating the new rules, airlines have been arguing for less rest and more duty time, while pilots have been arguing for more rest and less duty time. The FAA estimates that the new rules will costs airlines approximately $300 million a year. However, Airlines for America, the industry trade group representing airlines, estimates that it could in fact cost as much as $2 billion a year, which would have to be absorbed by the consumer in the form of increased fares.

Interestingly, cargo pilots are exempted from the new rules. Cargo companies argued that their pilots have gotten used to flying during the night, and that applying the rule would mean that their pilots could not sleep at night and fly by day as much, which would be disruptive. However, Robert Travis, the president of UPS’ union, did not agree with his company’s position:

“Giving air cargo carriers the choice to opt-in to new pilot rest rules makes a much sense as allowing truckers to ‘opt-out’ of drunk driving laws,” he said.

The new rules hopefully will improve safety in the American skies in an effective way…