Potential Impacts
MEC members who voted to urge Congress to pass a law placing us under Part 117 freely acknowledge that, although "only" 20-30% of our bidpacks are non-compliant with Part 117, 40-50% of the bidpack lines would likely have to change to bring us into compliance. Forty. To. Fifty. Percent.
Under Part 117 (shown here), although 5 nighttime duty periods (0200-0559 LBT) are allowed, EACH one of those periods must allow for 2 hours in a sleep room. That 2 hours is measured from the time the pilot arrives at the sleep room (probably block-in plus 30 minutes) until show time of the next flight. How many lines allow for this? How many sought-after week-on/week-off night hub turn lines allow for this? In the February 2020 MD-11 bidback, line 1190 (pure EWR/MEM night hub turns), for example, allows for 58 minutes of rest, obliterating the possibility of this pure week-on/week-off line or any like it. Without that 2-hour rest, three days in a row is the maximum number of night hub turns.
The flight schedules are a fixed piece of our system. Pairings and lines are not. To follow Part 117, these lines would now likely have a dead day in the middle of the week in domicile. Why in the world would the company choose to keep the trip-rig clock ticking and lay us over in EWR to make this a week long pairing? To think they'd do that is not rational.
Though NOBODY has ever constructed pairings and lines of our flight schedule under these rules (or if they have, nobody has shared them with the pilot group), it appears likely on its face that the impact would be shorter trips and more frequent swaps from days to nights. That in-the-groove nighttime routine reached on day two or three of a week of night hub turns would never happen. That is NOT one level of safety. We all know that the more frequent those day/night swaps occur, the more fatigue goes up exponentially. Furthermore the week-on/week-off system form and lifestyles around which we've built our families will be a thing of the past
Under Part 117 (shown here), although 5 nighttime duty periods (0200-0559 LBT) are allowed, EACH one of those periods must allow for 2 hours in a sleep room. That 2 hours is measured from the time the pilot arrives at the sleep room (probably block-in plus 30 minutes) until show time of the next flight. How many lines allow for this? How many sought-after week-on/week-off night hub turn lines allow for this? In the February 2020 MD-11 bidback, line 1190 (pure EWR/MEM night hub turns), for example, allows for 58 minutes of rest, obliterating the possibility of this pure week-on/week-off line or any like it. Without that 2-hour rest, three days in a row is the maximum number of night hub turns.
The flight schedules are a fixed piece of our system. Pairings and lines are not. To follow Part 117, these lines would now likely have a dead day in the middle of the week in domicile. Why in the world would the company choose to keep the trip-rig clock ticking and lay us over in EWR to make this a week long pairing? To think they'd do that is not rational.
Though NOBODY has ever constructed pairings and lines of our flight schedule under these rules (or if they have, nobody has shared them with the pilot group), it appears likely on its face that the impact would be shorter trips and more frequent swaps from days to nights. That in-the-groove nighttime routine reached on day two or three of a week of night hub turns would never happen. That is NOT one level of safety. We all know that the more frequent those day/night swaps occur, the more fatigue goes up exponentially. Furthermore the week-on/week-off system form and lifestyles around which we've built our families will be a thing of the past