Nobody likes being asked to work more for no extra money, which is pretty clearly what the company is looking for.

The interesting thing about this is that there has never been an ultra long haul operation on this scale before. One set of rules and remuneration covering such a diverse set of circumstances is pretty difficult to achieve.

The company's point of view is that for part of the flight you are not required and are therefore off the clock, whilst enjoying free time in a luxurious cabin!

Obviously the reality of time changes, night flying with less than ideal rest opportunities and the pretty clear (as far as I know) legal point that the designated commander is on duty even when in the bunk make this at best a grey area. I am unaware of a fatigue study that covers well the specific Emirate's set of circumstances.

MK the cargo airline that had the spectacular crash in the northeastern USA some years ago as a result of performance calculation errors were operating with crews that more or less lived on the airplane. There was a captain's cabin and they would do multiple back to back transatlantic trips. That did not end well.

The company sees this as getting a couple more days productivity out of guys who in the extreme case could be doing 6 legs/days in a month and maxing out on hours. The employee's perspective is of an hourly rate paid when on the airplane, which in this case is going to take a dive and of a couple of days less time off at home.

Presumably the cruise second officer option used by a number of other ULR operators (Cathay/Qantas) remains a back pocket option if this does not work out. Indeed as some have pointed out the erosion of terms and conditions may increase attrition to such an extent that they are forced to act in a way more favorable to their pilots, but then again hell may freeze over first.

A small point, but Halifax, Nova Scotia (CYHZ) is not in the northeastern USA. (MK1602)

As far as where EK's "MK Moment" will occur, it's anyone's guess. But keep pushing it Emirates, and you'll find out I guess.

Not wishing to nitpick, but actually, we don't. At least, not always. It's quite possible for fatigue to affect your ability to realise how tired/fatigued you are.

If you are that tired, call sick - fatigued, and go to the clinic.

Lack of sleep 'is worse than alcohol' - Telegraph

And of course that does not take into account Boyles law, which means we are fundamentally hypoxic and dehydrated while resting luxuriously next to the wailing kid who is centimetres from our heads. :ugh::ugh:

"Rostered up to 105 hrs per colander month".... I feel the strain already :)

Never in 13+ ever rostered for 100+ , early days of the 345 had some last minute changes that provided big OT at the time.

Fatbus

The 105 hrs per month is the new future for EK, forget the last 13 years

Jumeirah Jane - it took me a moment to sift through your comment but that's clever and funny!

If 105 hours is really the new target, never before has an operation of the type that EK does, been flown with people flying those type of hours. IMO, it is a very dangerous experiment.

Show me a few of the 105 hr rosters, if it's the new norm than there should be thousands of examples . Dangerous for sure. And again ultimate responsibility falls on the Capt. I won't be me doing anything close to that.

The 105 is plucked out of the air by DH, I'd wait before getting you knickers in a twist.

Doing 90+ a month now. Can't and won't do more. Only difference will be that my SKF rate will increase signifficantly.

Recent wash up - new ftl's will not be implemented by Emirates. AS to announce shortly. Clutching at straws maybe but perhaps a glimmer of hope.

I remember when TCAS said 92hrs would not become a new target. Man of his word that fella.

Is that because they are planning something worse?

FTLs
 

As an aside , and forgive the drift, China has just dropped the FTL limit from 1000 hours to 900 this year. So that is likely to precipitate a ~10% increase in crew needs. FYI for those thinking of alternatives. Oh, and I know it's not all beer n skittles in China , but CSA might be looking at B787 to Perth soon which might help establish a Boeing Base in OZ. The 330 ones are working pretty well at the moment. Other bases maybe not so good , so frustration out there in that respect. Rome and NBO on this years agenda too ( for those EU types perhaps)

Woodja

Certainly if they are not planning to use the new FTL's they will try and spin it into what a favour they are doing us :}
Because they really care about our fatigue levels

Woodja, nbo? As a crew base ? Really.

I see what Ek is doing....

Spread rumours of 105h... Let the idiots( me and all of us) moan about it...

Send an Email that EK will not implement it and wait....

All happy again how great EK is.... And bk to 90+ hours but this time... ONLY 90+ hours....

Awesome ..... I LOVE EK... They realy look after their staff

Link for information concerning GCAA Subpart Q