Unfortunately I shall not be in Strasbourg at all that week which is very unusual for me. I never miss votes on the Thursday I always wait until it is completed before going home. My absence is entirely due to arrangements I made quite a long time ago when the Schedule did not show a Plenary session that week. The Schedule has since been altered and I cannot change my arrangements, which is very unfortunate because I would have wished to support you.

Extraordinary! You can vote for a whole change in national government by post, but you can't vote in a parliamentary vote. If there are too many of these fellows then the vote could go, not the way of majority thinking, but the way of a zealous few; who perhaps are having their brown envelopes stuffed a little extra by vested interests. In a real democracy the will of the voting members should count for something, but if the rules say you have to be present in person, and that is clearly not always possible, then the democratic will is denied its truth.

RAT5

Exactly! Not fit for purpose, by any modern standards.

Remind me, when the EU actually submitted an annual account that has been signed off?:ugh::mad:

Remind me, when the EU actually submitted an annual account that has been signed off?
 

And just remember it's YOUR taxes for which the accounting is inadequate and possibly fraudulent!

If it was a small business in UK, the person responsible would probably be in court for failure to ACCOUNT for the monies various which had passed through their hands.

But it's one law for the peasants and another for the Jose Manuels of this world!

And it worries me that supposedly professional pilots on this forum can actually have the temerity to defend such a corrupt institution.

Obviously the psychometric testing is and has been failing for a long time.....:rolleyes:

MPs certainly have to be present in the UK Parliament to vote. I think that this is the case in most parliaments. I can imagine the reaction in the UK if MPs were allowed to vote without attending Parliament!

Would you still support postal votes if the MEP had indicated that he would have voted to support rules had he been present?

I WON'T TURN UP IF YOU DON'T.
 

"I can imagine the reaction in the UK if MPs were allowed to vote without attending Parliament!"

I think it is (or was) called PAIRING and is done quite frequently in the House of Commons.

I wait to be corrected.........................................

Further to posting # 41.
 

"FRANKFURT, Oct 4 (Reuters) - The air traffic controllers union in Europe (ATCEUC) has called off a strike planned for Oct. 10 after the European Commission signalled its willingness to renegotiate plans to liberalise civil airspace."

Sounds like the only language they'll understand?? :D

I thought MEPS sign on in strasbourg, early, then bugger off home, and as l understand it they are largely tax free!

Barkingmad

Pairing is not a voting system. It is a system to avoid the displeasure of party whips if for some reason you cannot be present to vote when they want you to.

Who's side are you on?!
 

Cathar : "Pairing is an arrangement where an MP of one party agrees with an MP of an opposing party not to vote in a particular division. This gives both MPs the opportunity not to attend. Pairing is an informal arrangement and is not recognised by the House of Commons' rules. Such arrangements have to be registered with the whips who check that the agreement is stuck to. Pairing is not allowed in divisions of great political importance but pairings can last for months or years." Quote from Parliament UK site.

So you agree with your oppo in the other party that your vote would cancel out their vote, so it's off to the taxpayer-funded second home for a spot of R&R whilst effectively voting whichever way on whichever resolution!



I don't really see what difference this makes in your point, basically they can fail to be there if it's not important enough, like awkward issues such as pilots' working/rest hours?


Are you a professional pilot, as your details are sketchy to say the least?


If you aren't, I invite you to remove yourself from this forum and go argue in Jet Blast or somewhere more suitable.


From your postings I suspect you are



(a) NOT a professional pilot


(b) certainly NOT on our side trying to fight an important issue affecting the lives of all those in the profession, their families and their unsuspecting passengers.

:yuk:

Well as an aside as someone who really does live in 09 I'd be fascinated to find out if there really is another pro down here in this forgotten part of the world..

Sorry, Wiggy, that I am not still current, but I did try in some earlier contributions to show what things were like 50+ years ago, Pre FTLs on long haul with a full crew (with F/E) and BUNKS.

I am sure that we were not as alert as we should have been throughout some of the flights.

The current FTLs MUST be an improvement or has little bean learned? Or have human beings changed in such a short time ?

(A relative was elected an M.P. several times. He felt that to be a " great honour" and attended Parliament very regularly. He was not paid. ( M.P.s were not paid before 1911.))

The EC is well aware of the parliament timetable and the timing of when it went to the committee and therefore the probability of a subsequent vote. These dates are not accidental. Conspiracy is a loaded word - more like trying to get legislation approved rapidly by whatever means possible; all legislation is mishandled in this way to avoid having MEPs interfere with the running of the EU by the EC.

Barking - problem is most of EU Pilots are already working to near EASA limits, safely every day/night into the UK.
Also what makes you assume that should EASA FTL come into force in the UK that UK airlines will just turn the limits on and that's it?
And stop calling me Shirley, surely :\

Rat - I had a similar response also same MEP i guess. What made it worse was that he obviously just cut and pasted his reply about how he fully supported the Pilots - great, except to say i'd emailed him to say I fully supported the proposed change to EASA FTL. :\

Who is who
Kallas
Vice President of the European Commission in charge of transport since 2010, was, among others, President of the Bank of Estonia, Minister of Finance and Prime Minister of Estonia.
So no aviation culture and totally ignorant of the work of crews and the consequences of fatigue
Claude Chene
: Kallas advisor for aviation, French, he holds a DES in economic sciences and specialize in issues related to competition
which obviously gives it a great experience of air transport and the effects of fatigue on the effectiveness of teams.

:ugh:

Is this the right answer?
 

Thank you for contacting me to express concern about the proposed changes to EU rules on European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) Flight and Duty Time Limitations and rest requirements for commercial air transport. I of course understand your concern that revision of EU rules should not run the risk of increasing fatigue, which is crucially linked to the safety of the pilot, the crew and the passengers.

The European Parliament's Transport and Tourism committee (TRAN) has indeed rejected to the European Commission's flight and duty time limitations measures, but the proposal is now set to be voted on by the plenary of the Parliament on October 9th.

Liberal Democrat MEPs, as part of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats group, support a 'Single European Sky' agreement, which will have numerous benefits for the European aviation market. My colleague Phil Bennion MEP, the Liberal Democrat European transport spokesman, is aware of the pilots' concerns but believes a set of common rules would mean "less unnecessary red tape for airlines, fewer delays for passengers and a more efficient and environmentally sustainable aviation market. British passengers travelling on other European airlines will also be far safer in the knowledge that there are robust, common limits on maximum flight time for pilots across the EU."

Phil Bennion has consulted the UK Civil Aviation Authority regarding the Commission proposal, and their view is that it provides a level of safety broadly equivalent to that provided by existing UK rules. Some provisions are less restrictive than the UK requirements, whereas others are more restrictive. Also, in addition to hard limits, the Commission proposal contains 'outcome requirements' that improve on current UK - requirements and in line with UK thinking on aviation safety rules.

On fatigue more precisely, the Regulation establishes outcome-based rules which will require airlines to manage fatigue actively rather than rely on compliance with set limits and ensure fatigue is being appropriately managed through additional regulatory tools. The 22-hour figure that has been widely quoted is argued to be disingenuous as it counts a 10 hour 'at home' period, where pilots can be asleep, as work.

The UK government supports the European Commission's proposal as they are satisfied the Regulation will not lead to any diminution in safety in the UK. Failure to adopt the Flying Time Limits Regulation will result in the existing, less effective, EU rules remaining in force with no scope for amendment for a number of years.

Yours sincerely,

MEP (withheld)

"OUTCOME-BASED RULES" and other gobbldeygook..........
 

I have to presume this means we'll operate to this new corporate friendly scheme, until the outcome involves tombstones, by which time they'll be far away as the minister for something else and everyone will have forgotten who were the architects of this dodgy edifice?

So this village idiot thinks that during a daytime standby I should sleep so that I can operate safely due to having rested all day.

What if I am not called out.

I am then on standby the next day having not rested well due to having rested all day. I hope I don't get called out as I have had a terrible night of sleep and feel very tired.

This idiot has NO idea of the way we manage our lives around reserve duties, back of the clock operations or ULR flying and HAS NO RIGHT to determine the way we will all have to work in future. This will flow on to other jurisdictions without a doubt.

The political class are getting dumber by the day.

Not surprising but hugely disappointing.

Idiot MEP's who sleep in the chamber when they are tired or still drunk from a heavy night out in Strasbourg, dictating how pilots should work at the bidding of the Airline bosses.