PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - pilots against hours increase
View Single Post
Old 29th May 2004 | 17:10
  #132 (permalink)  
hapzim
 
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 474
Likes: 0
From: uk
Back to the top to keep everyone thinking about hours and fatigue with the proposed changes in FTL's.

Below some of the latest from Balpa.

For those pilots/potential pilots within europe not in a union the text it is worth some thought as it will also affect your future lifestyle.



There is a very real danger that a European Council of Ministers meeting on 10th/11th June could adopt new FTLs. The proposed Sub Part Q would, for instance, introduce a basic FDP limit for 2 pilots of 13 hours with an extra hour on top with "operator's discretion", minimum rest periods calculated on previous FDP - NOT duty - and insufficient reduction in FDP for multi sector days.
Together with our colleagues in ECA we are pressing
* To ensure the Council of Ministers does not endorse the current proposals.
* To build political and public support for a European FTL scheme designed using scientific evidence.
In support of our case we are arguing that:
* Science is not being allowed to express a view.
* Professional pilots are concerned for the safety of the travelling public
* We want a European scheme based on science, not political compromise.
* The current proposals
o would increase the probability of accidents (see attached chart from a recent FAA report on probability of accident v flight time)
o lead to working arrangements that affect the body more than the drink/driving level
o are at odds with what the law is now saying
o are less humane than the directive for the transport of animals! (see Directive attached)
We have agreed within ECA a campaign that will operate in each country and at European level. It has 4 levels:
Level 1 - Political.
* Members are already writing to their MP and Alistair Darling - the UK Minister who would attend the Council meeting. Examples of 2 of these are attached. We would ask all CCs to encourage members to follow this lead. Templates are not being supplied - in your own words works best; in person is a killer!
* We have written to prospective MEPs (copy attached) seeking their support both now, and in case the matter is agreed by the Council and goes back to the European Parliament. MEPs might be susceptible to an approach now (see website)
* In addition to writing to our Minister later next week, we will be lobbying the Commission and submitting scientific evidence that challenges their draft regulation. We will be quoting Article 95(3) of the Treaty that says laws must be written using available science. We will follow this up in both Houses of our own Parliament and seeking a review.
Level 2 - Legal
* We are exploring whether there is now European case law on how standby is counted.
* As with the Police Sky Marshall debate, we are exploring the interaction of Professional ethics, the ANO and new FTL laws that might force a pilot to make a decision that could be less safe. We will be running a members poll on our website next week asking if members support this approach.
Level 3 - Industrial
* Following on from the previous point we will be writing to your CEO outlining our concerns and highlighting the potential for disruption.
You could help in the industrial context by writing and asking your CEO for a statement on where they stand on the use of science in designing sub-part Q.
Level 4 - Public attitudes
* We are using MORI this weekend to ask the public who they trust to write these regulations.
* We will be briefing the press regularly, both in the UK and in Europe.
* We are writing to all interested consumer groups.
* We may be running a major Lobby of the Council meeting in Luxembourg on 10th June, further details will be sent to those members who volunteered last year.
We will know by 4th June if our argument is getting home and whether the issue will appear on the council agenda in Luxembourg. But our experience since the issue first arose over a decade ago, and of the Fully Awake campaign which successfully ran in January, is that the argument is never really won; they will keep coming back. And BALPA will continue to resist anything that is not based on science.
Hope you are all able to help (get a thread going on your forum, it is a great source of ideas; and wit!) And if you want to make suggestions please don't hold back.

Jim McAuslan, General Secretary
www.balpa.org

For those who wll be future passengers do you really want the folks at the front driving you at the ground to be knackered
hapzim is offline