Does that mean they will also ban commuters who drive 3-4hrs in traffic prior to sign-on too?
Which would be less fatiguing , the having a snooze whilst paxing to work or the long self drive to work ?

Yes! All employees must reside within Cumberland parish!

Exactly.

You could live in the Margaret River and drive to work yet someone else could live in Adelaide and that's not allowed. Could be interesting if they try to enforce it as I would assume the same would apply for all the USA flying.

It's going that way elsewhere. My outfit has published 'guidelines' regarding being 'rested for duty' to get them off the hook should an incident occur and the lawyers start asking awkward questions about whether the crew members were adequately rested. These guidelines include not more than 1 1/2 hours travel time from the airport.

So now we have commuters having to put themselves up in crappy, noisy hotels within 90 mins of the airports, and some of us having to stand our various iterations of Reserve duty in these joints.

Maybe it's not quite such a big consideration for domestic flights.

Does that mean they pay accordingly to live within 90mins?

Depends which airport! I make these points only because some airlines and perhaps regulators are becoming increasingly aware of protecting themselves from legal action regarding crew rest.

As an aside, I heard of a flight attendant who had a car accident driving home from a redeye flight, and the insurer would not pay out: 'not fit to drive' they said.

Pretty sure the horse has bolted with this, been told it's already happening on other (current) types

I am surprised we have not heard from Keg as he is PER based but resides in the SYD area.

Fwiw there is a policy on this in place (for now)

Your question answers itself:)

.
So what's the policy? Ignore what's happening?

Onus on the individual to be responsible

Which is what most people want, self responsibility, innit? (In general terms)

So would paxing on the last flight of the day to the other side of the country, then hanging around the terminal to operate boc to where they came from earlier fall into the category of "self responsibility"? In general terms?

For alt-paxing, this is just the company attempting to avoid scrutiny in the event of a fatigue related incident, while saving money in accommodation and allowances.

"He ticked the box saying he wasn't fatigued, so he clearly wasn't fatigued."

My guess will be that the rules introduced for commuting for ULR operations will be very similar to the acclimatisation rules airlines like EK et all use presently for that sort of operations.

Yeah well I dunno
Just saying how it is currently but that was before perth base ULR was in mind, more for paxing down on day of departure before where one may not have gotten sleep otherwise. Not too many have a sleep before operating the qf1 in the evening do they

It's not actually. There has been a significant amount of discussion within the group that looks at fatigue related issues amongst line pilots and it is still recognised that there is a joint responsibility to ensure a pilot arrives at work as rested and as fit as possible. This discussion has included looking at how other airlines manage commuting, including driving to work.

Alternate Paxing is just one part of the discussion; the main focus is on pilots being really fit to operate, no matter how they arrive at sign-on, whether its a 4 hour or 12 hour domestic day or a MEL-LAX or PER-LHR.

Rog approved said:

Serious question: Since the CASA announcement about another twelve month delay and are QF still going ahead with the FRMS?

Yes. Despite the delay, it remains a requirement for Qantas and other operators to introduce an FRMS in the designated timeframe.

Given one operator has the definition as flight deck duty starting with park brake release for pushback one has to wonder how the FRMS can be taken seriously.

Multiple airlines flying around the country with different definitions of flight deck duty ie one at park brake release another at sign on ...