Duty time?

[Neville Nobody]

I have tried to look this up, just got too hard. Can a pilot be on duty for three months straight, eight hours a day every day? I have been told part 61 allows this, doesn't sound right.

[c100driver]

Part 61 is pilot licensing so it will not have duty time limitations.

[Neville Nobody]

On AG or firebombing CAO 48 states there should be 36 hours free of duty associated with employment in any 14 consecutive days.

Pilots are still doing three months straight, every day, every week, every month for at least three months sometimes four on Government contracts.

CASA not interested? Surely they know this is going on, if they don't it's incompetence.
You would think both CASA and the various State government, bodies condoning this practice would not be fulfilling their duty of care and due diligence?

[Stretch06]

The only way that would be possible would be if the operation was considered a private operation. As such the regulations of CAO48 don't legally apply however most people I know who do private operations still use CAO48 as the guide to duty requirements.

[Aussie Bob]

I don't think so Neville. I have it (verbally of course) from an FOI, that in GA you can only work five days straight without a fatigue management system.

But, like you, it's too hard for me to look up. Someone more legislatively inclined may help.

[Neville Nobody]

Aussie Bob in AG you can work up to 13 days straight, but then you have to have 36 hours off. On fire contracts that's not being done, as I said on duty three months every single day.
State Government departments must know about this, CASA would have to know. How are companies getting away with it?
Is CASA just turning a blind eye or is there something more involved?

[Aussie Bob]

I see your point Neville, along with the uselessness of my above reply. I hope you can resolve this. Even 13 days straight is over he top.

[Neville Nobody]

You would think there would be more checks/balances and surveillance involved in Government contracts. As I said both CASA and State Government would be negligent with their duty of care. Companies would have to know what they are doing is wrong and illegal.
On the surface it appears a flagrant disregard of the law, with the big money involved in contracts is there more to it?

[slim pickings]

Simply put no they can't. CAO48 applies as does the exemption to CAO48. Minimum duty free periods are applicable at daily, weekly and monthly levels. None are difficult to interpret.

If you're employed' in private operations it would be grossly remiss of your employer to not observe some guidelines to duty free periods. As such that sword may also fall on you should an accident occur.

[Neville Nobody]

Slim said
"If you're employed' in private operations it would be grossly remiss of your employer to not observe some guidelines to duty free periods. As such that sword may also fall on you should an accident occur."


Bad enough if it was private ops, this is commercial.
As I said it is condoned by CASA and the State body responsible.


With contracts in the millions of dollars a sword should fall on the companies responsible.

[Howard Hughes]

As always sounds like companies under resourcing their contracts to minimise tender price/maximise profits. When will Government departments learn you don't get a premium product by giving it to the lowest bidder! Do the bean counters even care?

I'm lucky to work for an organisation that resources its contracts properly! :ok:

[slim pickings]

Nev that's just not possible. There's no way that CASA would condone this. The operator may have TOLD you this but that's clearly rubbish. I'd be talking to CASA confidentially or better still the AFAP.

You need some help with this.

[Neville Nobody]

Slim, you seen what happens to whistle blowers? Bullying, intimidation and implied and real career repercussions.


CASA must know, if they don't it's negligence.
The same with State bodies, how high up does the knowledge go?


It crosses from employee discrimination to a serious law breach if records have been altered or entered falsely.

[slim pickings]

Probably best to find another gig Nev.

[slim pickings]

Stikibeke,

The original question was with regards to duty not flight.

[Stikybeke]

Got that Slim,

I've deleted my response as I missed the earlier post by C1000.

Thanks,
Stiky:ok:

[Hans Solo]

Hey Nev,

Just get the AFAP to look into it...its anonymous and they aren't going to tell the employer who ratted on them :))
Trust me, it works!

Hans

[currawong]

CAO 48?

Part 137 is probably where you should be looking.

The duty times contained therein were designed with firefighting in mind.

As you say, 36 hours straight off per 14 days.

That used to be an exemption that not everybody had, under the old CAO.

Could be there are further exemptions available with an appropriate "fatigue management plan".

Or not....

[havick]

Read CAO48.1 and Relevant appendix. All is revealed.