Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
klm617
Posts: 5114
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Mon Jun 03, 2019 2:38 am

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:
I think the bigger issue is why are the employees directly or indirectly leaking internal company matters to a “media” outlet.

In most organizations airing internal company matters as such could be worthy of termination.

I question if this was actually sent out my anyone even remotely involved with the event or if this is more desperate union drive saber rattling propaganda.

This stuff goes on at every airline trying to get the best outcomes with limited resources. Creative ways to avoid crew time outs happens all the time. Plenty of airlines will pull the brakes push back 2 ft then pop a door to finish loading late bags. Closing the door immediately after the last passenger onboard with full aisles, etc.

Yawn....


Again anyway you look at it it's an unethical way to treat employees.
the truth does matter, guys. too bad it's often quite subjective. the truth is beyond the mere facts and figures. it's beyond good and bad, right and wrong...
 
ScorpioMC3
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2019 8:52 am

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Mon Jun 03, 2019 3:29 am

zeke wrote:
smartplane wrote:
"Delta acknowledged the Flight 1990 incident in a statement to HuffPost, saying it was a breakdown of company protocol."

Presumably the breakdown in company protocol was the broadcast message, not the intent or action.


I think the problem is with the delivery of the message not the content.

Normally crew have a maximum number of hours that they can be pre-planned to work, however on the day due to something like this technical delay they can consent to extending that by a couple of hours. Normally it involves extra pay and most are happy to continue on as they are already at work.


You've never been a flight attendant or pilot, have you? Because if you have you'd know that most actually want to go to bed after being on duty for 15 hours (which is when Delta FAs can walk).
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15164
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Mon Jun 03, 2019 3:44 am

ScorpioMC3 wrote:
You've never been a flight attendant or pilot, have you? Because if you have you'd know that most actually want to go to bed after being on duty for 15 hours (which is when Delta FAs can walk).


Been an airline pilot for several decades, and I have had work "days" in excess of 30 hours. Fly somewhere for 15+ hrs, stay on the aircraft and position home for another 15+ hours. Our single sector maximum flight duty period to operate under our regulations is 19 hours. I have had to divert before due Wx at the end of a long flight, and then do another sector. Everyone wanted to do the extra short sector to get home rather than spend a night in another country.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
AST1Driver
Posts: 120
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2012 4:07 pm

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Mon Jun 03, 2019 5:19 am

Ok, so did the FAs actually go illegal completing this flight? If not then this is a whole lot of nothing. If they did then the issue needs to be investigated and fixed. I have not see the ACARS messages, but it sounds like things could have worded better. I would also like to know what the crew working the flight has to say. Delta says it is looking into it. Maybe we should wait for the results before chiming in. (Oh wait, this is Anet)

We all know that the IAM is pushing this article and will say anything to put Delta in a bad light. Crew members are very much aware of their duty times, and the limits set by the airline and FAA. There is a lot of info left out of this article. What time did they actually board the flight? Was it a gate return? Were the passengers allowed to get on/off the aircraft during the delay? When was the door first closed? Was the jetway pulled? Gate and ramp agents are often sent messages on delayed flights reminding them of "drop dead" times for crew members. This is to insure that everything is ready to go before then.
 
greendot
Posts: 214
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2017 6:08 pm

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Mon Jun 03, 2019 6:48 am

jayunited wrote:
RDUDDJI wrote:
Absolutely false. All employees have resources. Additionally, at a non-union company you can actually interact with management directly.

As others have pointed out this type of scenario happens everywhere, a union makes zero difference in this case but nice try.


A union makes a huge difference in these types of situations because a UA flight attendant could have requested the door either be reopened or could have refused to let the agent close the door especially in this type of situation when you are approaching duty limitations. In this situation when the FA's are so close to their maximum duty hours with the aircraft on maintenance UA's FA's would supersede any door close order from management. DL's flight attendants for all intents and purposes were trapped on board a flight that was sitting at the gate on a mechanical delay and couldn't do anything about it. At UA FA's are required to take the flight only if the aircraft pushes and is ready for departure. If DL's FA's had a union this aircraft would have never left the gate and further more the agent would have never been able to close the door so close to duty time especially seeing the aircraft wasn't ready for departure. DL's FA's do not have the same work rules or the same protection or rights that union FA's do at UA.


This is not the gate agent's call nor the FA's. It is exclusively the Captain's choice by 14 CFR. Gate agents and FAs always have to ask the Captain.
 
greendot
Posts: 214
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2017 6:08 pm

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Mon Jun 03, 2019 6:50 am

klm617 wrote:
PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:
I think the bigger issue is why are the employees directly or indirectly leaking internal company matters to a “media” outlet.

In most organizations airing internal company matters as such could be worthy of termination.

I question if this was actually sent out my anyone even remotely involved with the event or if this is more desperate union drive saber rattling propaganda.

This stuff goes on at every airline trying to get the best outcomes with limited resources. Creative ways to avoid crew time outs happens all the time. Plenty of airlines will pull the brakes push back 2 ft then pop a door to finish loading late bags. Closing the door immediately after the last passenger onboard with full aisles, etc.

Yawn....


Again anyway you look at it it's an unethical way to treat employees.


Unfortunately it's perfectly ethical. Ethics are a standard defined by the industry. It is, however, immoral.
 
deltatim
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:46 am

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Mon Jun 03, 2019 7:15 am

Good God almighty - I've never heard such an embellished story in my life. Delta F/As have a wonderful job - they get thousands and thousands of applications and only hire a very small percentage. I worked for DL for 22 years, and it's common knowledge there that the pilots and F/As are the best treated folks at the company... and so they are. No one was being "trapped". Good grief.
 
Max Q
Posts: 8514
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Mon Jun 03, 2019 8:07 am

The door does have a handle on the inside
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.


GGg
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Moderator
Posts: 4299
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Mon Jun 03, 2019 11:22 am

Stick to discussing the topic. This isn't a pro union vs anti union discussion — those posts will be removed as they're unrelated to the topic. That discussion can be had in the Non Aviation Forum.

✈️ atcsundevil
 
xdlx
Posts: 965
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 12:29 pm

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Mon Jun 03, 2019 1:00 pm

Pretty serious finger pointing in this thread.... did the PIC requested from OPS to have the door open for FA to coordinate their options with OCC? OR as insinuated; this is the case of a green OCC coordinator going "above and beyond" to avoid an inevitable situation of "crew fatigue" and its consequences.
Either way it seems to me the "ALPA" representation from the cockpit would have been sufficient to raise the issue, if there ever was one. Decisions like this one are taken every day and the portrayal of a insensitive workplace is exaggerated.....
 
User avatar
EA CO AS
Posts: 15747
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:54 am

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Mon Jun 03, 2019 3:18 pm

Boof02671 wrote:
Hence why they are trying to unionize


Why would that matter? Nothing DL did here would have violated the language of any existing CBA in place at other airlines, so it’s not like being union at DL would have made a difference.
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan

Comments made here are my own and are not intended to represent the official position of Alaska Air Group
 
Boof02671
Posts: 2195
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2016 12:15 am

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Mon Jun 03, 2019 3:34 pm

EA CO AS wrote:
Boof02671 wrote:
Hence why they are trying to unionize


Why would that matter? Nothing DL did here would have violated the language of any existing CBA in place at other airlines, so it’s not like being union at DL would have made a difference.

You don’t get it, yes it would have as AA, UA and WN FAs would have the security of a CBA, and would be able to walk without discipline.
Last edited by Boof02671 on Mon Jun 03, 2019 3:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
CobaltScar
Posts: 753
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 2:30 pm

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Mon Jun 03, 2019 3:38 pm

EA CO AS wrote:
Boof02671 wrote:
Hence why they are trying to unionize


Why would that matter? Nothing DL did here would have violated the language of any existing CBA in place at other airlines, so it’s not like being union at DL would have made a difference.


As I said above, the difference is accountability. Under a union a grievance can be filed and monetary compensation be made. At non-union the FAs are reduced to bartering and bargaining with OPS, JUST like the FA in the above story did, asking for a dead head the next day as a return favor for continuing to operate this flight.

Its about relative power. With a contract there are obligations. Under direct relationship there is just what management is willing to do that day, hour, or minute.

At YOUR airline there are contractual measure that call for triple pay for the FAs if they are worked passed a certain number of hours. Everyone knows what to expect in that situation. That is better than having to beg on the phone hoping they reward you with a dead head the next day like this Delta FA did. And since it was Toronto they were headed to, fat chance they were going to deadhead back the next day.
 
cdgdtw
Posts: 163
Joined: Sun May 04, 2003 6:34 am

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Mon Jun 03, 2019 4:02 pm

RDUDDJI wrote:
slcdeltarumd11 wrote:
Not my opinion , reality is Delta would never have done this to unionized employees. Unionized employees have resources. Anyway can bet given the current drive to unionize delta is going to find these employees and shower them in gifts and compensation to keep them quiet and happy.


Absolutely false. All employees have resources. Additionally, at a non-union company you can actually interact with management directly.

As others have pointed out this type of scenario happens everywhere, a union makes zero difference in this case but nice try.



Not so. Unionized crew freely interact with management at all levels. It is well known anti-union propaganda to say that you need to "go through" your union to speak to anyone. It is true that these situations will happen at both union and non-union carriers, but the prescribed remedies are vastly different.
 
BravoOne
Posts: 4094
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 2:27 pm

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Mon Jun 03, 2019 4:23 pm

So much drama over what most would consider a non event and certainly not worthy on a thread like this. Put your bog boy on and press on as this was a minor event in the scheme of things.
 
nws2002
Posts: 920
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 11:04 pm

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Mon Jun 03, 2019 4:57 pm

I hate when OCC tries to cause disagreements between crews and station agents like this. If ops told me to close the door to trap the crew, I'd hang up with them and turn to the crew and ask they are ready to close the door because ops wants it closed. If they say no, I'm not closing it. We are all a team, I'm not trapping someone on an aircraft just so they can't call out.
 
Detroit313
Posts: 547
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2017 2:56 pm

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Mon Jun 03, 2019 7:25 pm

The Delta pilots are so lucky. With so many other Delta groups not unionized, they get to negotiate the whole pie when it is time for a new contract.

I feel bad for Delta flight attendants. One day I hope they will realize how much they lose without a union. Every little detail makes a huge difference in this job.
 
User avatar
EA CO AS
Posts: 15747
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:54 am

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Mon Jun 03, 2019 9:24 pm

Boof02671 wrote:
EA CO AS wrote:
Boof02671 wrote:
Hence why they are trying to unionize


Why would that matter? Nothing DL did here would have violated the language of any existing CBA in place at other airlines, so it’s not like being union at DL would have made a difference.

You don’t get it, yes it would have as AA, UA and WN FAs would have the security of a CBA, and would be able to walk without discipline.


The DL crew could have done so as well; at no point were they threatened with disciplinary action, and when the cabin door was opened, they opted to remain.
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan

Comments made here are my own and are not intended to represent the official position of Alaska Air Group
 
User avatar
EA CO AS
Posts: 15747
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:54 am

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Mon Jun 03, 2019 9:29 pm

CobaltScar wrote:
As I said above, the difference is accountability. Under a union a grievance can be filed and monetary compensation be made. At non-union the FAs are reduced to bartering and bargaining with OPS, JUST like the FA in the above story did, asking for a dead head the next day as a return favor for continuing to operate this flight.

Its about relative power. With a contract there are obligations. Under direct relationship there is just what management is willing to do that day, hour, or minute.

At YOUR airline there are contractual measure that call for triple pay for the FAs if they are worked passed a certain number of hours. Everyone knows what to expect in that situation. That is better than having to beg on the phone hoping they reward you with a dead head the next day like this Delta FA did. And since it was Toronto they were headed to, fat chance they were going to deadhead back the next day.


And again, there was nothing here that would have been able to be grieved if they were under any existing CBAs at other carriers. They were not threatened with discipline, they were not held in continuation of service against their will, and volunteered to work the flight, they weren’t “volunTOLD.”

Using this event as proof DL is abusing FAs and that inflight needs to unionize is a union straw man, nothing more.
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan

Comments made here are my own and are not intended to represent the official position of Alaska Air Group
 
Boof02671
Posts: 2195
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2016 12:15 am

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Mon Jun 03, 2019 10:01 pm

EA CO AS wrote:
Boof02671 wrote:
EA CO AS wrote:

Why would that matter? Nothing DL did here would have violated the language of any existing CBA in place at other airlines, so it’s not like being union at DL would have made a difference.

You don’t get it, yes it would have as AA, UA and WN FAs would have the security of a CBA, and would be able to walk without discipline.


The DL crew could have done so as well; at no point were they threatened with disciplinary action, and when the cabin door was opened, they opted to remain.

That you don’t know, DL is notorious for discipline.
 
Boof02671
Posts: 2195
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2016 12:15 am

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Mon Jun 03, 2019 10:03 pm

EA CO AS wrote:
CobaltScar wrote:
As I said above, the difference is accountability. Under a union a grievance can be filed and monetary compensation be made. At non-union the FAs are reduced to bartering and bargaining with OPS, JUST like the FA in the above story did, asking for a dead head the next day as a return favor for continuing to operate this flight.

Its about relative power. With a contract there are obligations. Under direct relationship there is just what management is willing to do that day, hour, or minute.

At YOUR airline there are contractual measure that call for triple pay for the FAs if they are worked passed a certain number of hours. Everyone knows what to expect in that situation. That is better than having to beg on the phone hoping they reward you with a dead head the next day like this Delta FA did. And since it was Toronto they were headed to, fat chance they were going to deadhead back the next day.


And again, there was nothing here that would have been able to be grieved if they were under any existing CBAs at other carriers. They were not threatened with discipline, they were not held in continuation of service against their will, and volunteered to work the flight, they weren’t “volunTOLD.”

Using this event as proof DL is abusing FAs and that inflight needs to unionize is a union straw man, nothing more.

See above post. I know many FAs at DL, they tell a different story.
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 3698
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Mon Jun 03, 2019 10:34 pm

The motive behind the exposure or the "everyone does it" excuse are irrelevant to the fact that stunts like this shouldn't be used at airlines. That's not teamwork.

EA CO AS wrote:
And again, there was nothing here that would have been able to be grieved if they were under any existing CBAs at other carriers. They were not threatened with discipline, they were not held in continuation of service against their will, and volunteered to work the flight, they weren’t “volunTOLD.”

Using this event as proof DL is abusing FAs and that inflight needs to unionize is a union straw man, nothing more.


Are you trying to say that CBAs at others carriers aren't enforceable?

When you don't have an enforceable CBA to follow, you're being volunTOLD. When you don't have strong protections to comfortably deny such a request, you are being volunTOLD. The messages don't look like those of happy volunteers.
 
User avatar
EA CO AS
Posts: 15747
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:54 am

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Mon Jun 03, 2019 10:44 pm

MSPNWA wrote:
Are you trying to say that CBAs at others carriers aren't enforceable?


Not at all; I'm just saying that nothing DL did in this particular instance would have violated any language in any other existing CBA, to my knowledge. Can you tell me what contractual violation took place had this been at another carrier? Because while someone sent a message, there was no action that took place to constitute a violation.

MSPNWA wrote:
When you don't have an enforceable CBA to follow, you're being volunTOLD. When you don't have strong protections to comfortably deny such a request, you are being volunTOLD. The messages don't look like those of happy volunteers.


And yet plenty of contracts have language enabling the company to hold employees in continuation of service (provided they do not exceed federal, state, or local laws) when the operation dictates.
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan

Comments made here are my own and are not intended to represent the official position of Alaska Air Group
 
Boof02671
Posts: 2195
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2016 12:15 am

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Mon Jun 03, 2019 11:03 pm

EA CO AS wrote:
MSPNWA wrote:
Are you trying to say that CBAs at others carriers aren't enforceable?


Not at all; I'm just saying that nothing DL did in this particular instance would have violated any language in any other existing CBA, to my knowledge. Can you tell me what contractual violation took place had this been at another carrier? Because while someone sent a message, there was no action that took place to constitute a violation.

MSPNWA wrote:
When you don't have an enforceable CBA to follow, you're being volunTOLD. When you don't have strong protections to comfortably deny such a request, you are being volunTOLD. The messages don't look like those of happy volunteers.


And yet plenty of contracts have language enabling the company to hold employees in continuation of service (provided they do not exceed federal, state, or local laws) when the operation dictates.

You don’t get it. UA has duty times in the AFA CBA, the UA FAs could have walked with no discipline. You can’t say the same.

Red herring, this isn’t about a CBA requiring people to be mandatoried, nice try at deflection. This isn’t a federal, state or local law, and the RLA supersedes State and local laws.

Of course it would be a Grievance.
 
User avatar
EA CO AS
Posts: 15747
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:54 am

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Mon Jun 03, 2019 11:09 pm

Boof02671 wrote:
Of course it would be a Grievance.


It would only be a grievance if they were directed to continue work in violation of the contract, if there were one. And that never happened here; the crew chose to remain.
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan

Comments made here are my own and are not intended to represent the official position of Alaska Air Group
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 3698
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Mon Jun 03, 2019 11:13 pm

EA CO AS wrote:
MSPNWA wrote:
Are you trying to say that CBAs at others carriers aren't enforceable?


Not at all; I'm just saying that nothing DL did in this particular instance would have violated any language in any other existing CBA, to my knowledge. Can you tell me what contractual violation took place had this been at another carrier? Because while someone sent a message, there was no action that took place to constitute a violation.

MSPNWA wrote:
When you don't have an enforceable CBA to follow, you're being volunTOLD. When you don't have strong protections to comfortably deny such a request, you are being volunTOLD. The messages don't look like those of happy volunteers.


And yet plenty of contracts have language enabling the company to hold employees in continuation of service (provided they do not exceed federal, state, or local laws) when the operation dictates.


For example, the UA CBA has a maximum duty time. I assume other CBAs contain similar language. It cannot be exceeded against their will, and there would be repercussions if it is. Ops could certainly try to "trap" the FAs, but the FAs ultimately hold the power without consequence.

If I'm reading this right, you're treating this situation the same as if a CBA is in place. Since there was no "involuntary" action, there wouldn't be any difference with a CBA. I don't see how one can make that conclusion since a CBA changes the situation entirely. The FAs could have walked if they wanted to and not worried about their job.


If that is the contract language you're used to, that can hardly be called a contract.
 
Boof02671
Posts: 2195
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2016 12:15 am

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Mon Jun 03, 2019 11:28 pm

EA CO AS wrote:
Boof02671 wrote:
Of course it would be a Grievance.


It would only be a grievance if they were directed to continue work in violation of the contract, if there were one. And that never happened here; the crew chose to remain.

DL FAs DONT have that option, that’s what you aren’t getting. They are employees at will and can be disciplined and/or fired with no recourse.
 
ScorpioMC3
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2019 8:52 am

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Tue Jun 04, 2019 12:43 am

zeke wrote:
ScorpioMC3 wrote:
You've never been a flight attendant or pilot, have you? Because if you have you'd know that most actually want to go to bed after being on duty for 15 hours (which is when Delta FAs can walk).


Been an airline pilot for several decades, and I have had work "days" in excess of 30 hours. Fly somewhere for 15+ hrs, stay on the aircraft and position home for another 15+ hours. Our single sector maximum flight duty period to operate under our regulations is 19 hours. I have had to divert before due Wx at the end of a long flight, and then do another sector. Everyone wanted to do the extra short sector to get home rather than spend a night in another country.


Apples and oranges.
Are you US based? Because if you are, your 30 hour turn makes no sense to me. (It doesn't make sense even if you weren't US based). In the US, 19 hours is an allowable maximum for very specific FRMS flights that have to be approved ahead of time by the FAA and are double augmented. And in that situation, you have rest periods during the flight. When you're working a 4 leg domestic day, there is no crew rest, no opportunity to NOT be awake and alert.
 
Boof02671
Posts: 2195
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2016 12:15 am

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Tue Jun 04, 2019 12:54 am

A pilot can only duty for 13-19 hours in the US and then has to have a mandatory rest period
 
User avatar
NWAROOSTER
Posts: 1338
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:29 pm

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Tue Jun 04, 2019 1:18 am

EA CO AS wrote:
Boof02671 wrote:
EA CO AS wrote:

Why would that matter? Nothing DL did here would have violated the language of any existing CBA in place at other airlines, so it’s not like being union at DL would have made a difference.

You don’t get it, yes it would have as AA, UA and WN FAs would have the security of a CBA, and would be able to walk without discipline.


The DL crew could have done so as well; at no point were they threatened with disciplinary action, and when the cabin door was opened, they opted to remain.


At Delta the flight attendants are "At Will" employees. No threatening need to occur as the Flight Attendants were fully aware of the consequences of leaving the aircraft. :old:
Procrastination Is The Theft Of Time.......
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15164
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Tue Jun 04, 2019 1:46 am

ScorpioMC3 wrote:
Apples and oranges.
Are you US based? Because if you are, your 30 hour turn makes no sense to me. (It doesn't make sense even if you weren't US based). In the US, 19 hours is an allowable maximum for very specific FRMS flights that have to be approved ahead of time by the FAA and are double augmented. And in that situation, you have rest periods during the flight. When you're working a 4 leg domestic day, there is no crew rest, no opportunity to NOT be awake and alert.


Firstly you have a go at me for not being a pilot or flight attendant, then I have told you I am an airline pilot you not saying I am comparing apples an oranges. I am not employed by a US carrier, but I regularly fly sectors in excess of 15 hours. The example I cited where I had a 30+ hour “day” is also perfectly legal under FAA rules.

“If a flightcrew member engaged in deadhead transportation exceeds the applicable flight duty period in Table B of this part, the flightcrew member must be given a rest period equal to the length of the deadhead transportation but not less than the required rest in paragraph (e) of this section before beginning a flight duty period.“

Now going back,to,what I said before that you objected to “Normally crew have a maximum number of hours that they can be pre-planned to work, however on the day due to something like this technical delay they can consent to extending that by a couple of hours.”

This is true under FAA rules, “For augmented and unaugmented operations, if unforeseen operational circumstances arise prior to takeoff: The pilot in command and the certificate holder may extend the maximum flight duty period permitted in Tables B or C of this part up to 2 hours.”, and once airborne the maximum plus the extension can be exceeded, “The pilot in command and the certificate holder may extend maximum flight duty periods specified in Tables B or C of this part to the extent necessary to safely land the aircraft at the next destination airport or alternate airport, as appropriate.”
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
FlyingElvii
Posts: 948
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2017 10:53 pm

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Tue Jun 04, 2019 6:35 am

OKCDCA wrote:
Hang on just a minute... All of you screaming for unionization must’ve missed the part where the door was opened and they still didn’t walk. And kudos to DL for owning up to the incident and admitting the ops folks didn’t handle the situation in the best way. I’ve got a pretty good feeling those FA’s were taken care of after the fact based on DL’s response.

Delta has been putting a lot of pressure on the ops and sched folks for No cancels. As in Zero, even if they have to operate the flight the next morning.
Sounds as if someone was afraid of an FA fatigue call or a time out, and wanted the flight “out” to prevent it.
 
nwa2delta
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Jun 03, 2019 4:21 pm

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Tue Jun 04, 2019 7:46 am

This was a common practice at heavily unionized NWA so I'm not sure why anyone would hold this up as an example as to why we need a flight attendant union here at Delta.
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Moderator
Posts: 4299
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Tue Jun 04, 2019 1:53 pm

Discuss the topic or it will be locked. Union discussion isn't related to the topic; it will be deleted, users will be warned/banned, and the thread will be locked. I tried to do this nicely before, but apparently nobody paid any attention.

✈️ atcsundevil
 
Detroit313
Posts: 547
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2017 2:56 pm

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Tue Jun 04, 2019 3:16 pm

They are employees at will. Management can do whatever. The rules change all the time.
 
ScorpioMC3
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2019 8:52 am

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Tue Jun 04, 2019 3:26 pm

zeke wrote:
ScorpioMC3 wrote:
Apples and oranges.
Are you US based? Because if you are, your 30 hour turn makes no sense to me. (It doesn't make sense even if you weren't US based). In the US, 19 hours is an allowable maximum for very specific FRMS flights that have to be approved ahead of time by the FAA and are double augmented. And in that situation, you have rest periods during the flight. When you're working a 4 leg domestic day, there is no crew rest, no opportunity to NOT be awake and alert.


Firstly you have a go at me for not being a pilot or flight attendant, then I have told you I am an airline pilot you not saying I am comparing apples an oranges. I am not employed by a US carrier, but I regularly fly sectors in excess of 15 hours. The example I cited where I had a 30+ hour “day” is also perfectly legal under FAA rules.

“If a flightcrew member engaged in deadhead transportation exceeds the applicable flight duty period in Table B of this part, the flightcrew member must be given a rest period equal to the length of the deadhead transportation but not less than the required rest in paragraph (e) of this section before beginning a flight duty period.“

Now going back,to,what I said before that you objected to “Normally crew have a maximum number of hours that they can be pre-planned to work, however on the day due to something like this technical delay they can consent to extending that by a couple of hours.”

This is true under FAA rules, “For augmented and unaugmented operations, if unforeseen operational circumstances arise prior to takeoff: The pilot in command and the certificate holder may extend the maximum flight duty period permitted in Tables B or C of this part up to 2 hours.”, and once airborne the maximum plus the extension can be exceeded, “The pilot in command and the certificate holder may extend maximum flight duty periods specified in Tables B or C of this part to the extent necessary to safely land the aircraft at the next destination airport or alternate airport, as appropriate.”


I never objected to your point of a crew being able to extend. My apples and oranges statement refers to the fact that if you were operating a four-leg domestic day within the US, you do not have a rest period in the middle of the day. When you are operating a 15+ hour flight, you (and the FAs) have at least one period of rest where you can sleep! That is not something you are entitled to during domestic operations. You cannot compare a situation where a crewmember is deciding he is able to extend during a mx delay when he knows he has a 2-3 hour rest period coming in the middle of the flight to a domestic day where you have already been on duty for 11 hours and have already operated 3 take offs and landings (where the workload is the heaviest) without an intervening rest period.

I'm trying to understand this 30 hour day you're talking about. Are you saying that you fly your 15+ hour segment, have a rest period equal to that segment, then turn around and fly your 15+ hour segment back?
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15164
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Tue Jun 04, 2019 4:37 pm

ScorpioMC3 wrote:
I never objected to your point of a crew being able to extend. My apples and oranges statement refers to the fact that if you were operating a four-leg domestic day within the US, you do not have a rest period in the middle of the day.


You can do split duties under FAA rules.

ScorpioMC3 wrote:
You cannot compare a situation where a crewmember is deciding he is able to extend during a mx delay when he knows he has a 2-3 hour rest period coming in the middle of the flight to a domestic day where you have already been on duty for 11 hours and have already operated 3 take offs and landings (where the workload is the heaviest) without an intervening rest period.


Under FAA rules it is perfectly legal on a 4 sector day to extend by up to 2 hours for unforeseen reasons like a Mx delay without a rest period.

ScorpioMC3 wrote:
I'm trying to understand this 30 hour day you're talking about. Are you saying that you fly your 15+ hour segment, have a rest period equal to that segment, then turn around and fly your 15+ hour segment back?


I have flown ULH sectors, remain on the aircraft for the turnaround, and deadhead back, its over a 30 hr day. Perfectly legal also under FAA rules.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
DiamondFlyer
Posts: 3404
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 11:50 pm

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Tue Jun 04, 2019 4:45 pm

zeke wrote:
ScorpioMC3 wrote:
I never objected to your point of a crew being able to extend. My apples and oranges statement refers to the fact that if you were operating a four-leg domestic day within the US, you do not have a rest period in the middle of the day.


You can do split duties under FAA rules.

ScorpioMC3 wrote:
You cannot compare a situation where a crewmember is deciding he is able to extend during a mx delay when he knows he has a 2-3 hour rest period coming in the middle of the flight to a domestic day where you have already been on duty for 11 hours and have already operated 3 take offs and landings (where the workload is the heaviest) without an intervening rest period.


Under FAA rules it is perfectly legal on a 4 sector day to extend by up to 2 hours for unforeseen reasons like a Mx delay without a rest period.

ScorpioMC3 wrote:
I'm trying to understand this 30 hour day you're talking about. Are you saying that you fly your 15+ hour segment, have a rest period equal to that segment, then turn around and fly your 15+ hour segment back?


I have flown ULH sectors, remain on the aircraft for the turnaround, and deadhead back, its over a 30 hr day. Perfectly legal also under FAA rules.


A 2 hour extension under FAR 117 has to be agreed to by the flight crew, they cannot be forced to do so
From my cold, dead hands
 
Boof02671
Posts: 2195
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2016 12:15 am

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Tue Jun 04, 2019 4:57 pm

FAA rules state for a two pilot crew max duty times are 13 to 19 hours.
 
DiamondFlyer
Posts: 3404
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 11:50 pm

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Tue Jun 04, 2019 5:03 pm

Boof02671 wrote:
FAA rules state for a two pilot crew max duty times are 13 to 19 hours.


No, they state that max FLIGHT duty periods are 13 to 19 hours.
From my cold, dead hands
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15164
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Tue Jun 04, 2019 5:16 pm

DiamondFlyer wrote:
[
A 2 hour extension under FAR 117 has to be agreed to by the flight crew, they cannot be forced to do so


The actual FAA words are “For augmented and unaugmented operations, if unforeseen operational circumstances arise prior to takeoff: The pilot in command and the certificate holder may extend the maximum flight duty period permitted in Tables B or C of this part up to 2 hours.”

Under our regulations only the captain can extend for unforeseen circumstances.

Boof02671 wrote:
FAA rules state for a two pilot crew max duty times are 13 to 19 hours.


Not if you deadhead, basically your rest only starts after the deadhead, or after the FDP, whichever’s later.

“If a flightcrew member engaged in deadhead transportation exceeds the applicable flight duty period in Table B of this part, the flightcrew member must be given a rest period equal to the length of the deadhead transportation but not less than the required rest in paragraph (e) of this section before beginning a flight duty period.“
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
User avatar
EA CO AS
Posts: 15747
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:54 am

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Tue Jun 04, 2019 5:16 pm

BravoOne wrote:
atcsundevil wrote:
Discuss the topic or it will be locked. Union discussion isn't related to the topic; it will be deleted, users will be warned/banned, and the thread will be locked. I tried to do this nicely before, but apparently nobody paid any attention.

✈️ atcsundevil


I don't see how you can discuss this without invoking unions??


Agreed; I've let atcsundevil know this already, but the cited article clearly goes down that rabbit hole, making it fair game for discussion:

The incident shines a light on the rough hours many flight attendants have to work, and how airlines tighten up their staffing to keep costs down. Delta was obviously reluctant to bring in another crew to staff the plane, even though the attendants onboard might be overworked.

Flight attendant duty hours are often laid out in a union contract. Delta flight attendants are not unionized, although the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers is trying to organize them, as well as the company’s ramp agents.

The campaign recently became national news when the journalist Eoin Higgins posted anti-union material the airline produced to dissuade workers from unionizing.


Especially since the THIRD post here immediately takes the pro-union bait and went unchallenged by the mods:

Boof02671 wrote:
Hence why they are trying to unionize


Sorry, can't have it both ways, mods - either lock/delete the thread, remove ALL mention of unions entirely, or allow union debate to occur.
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan

Comments made here are my own and are not intended to represent the official position of Alaska Air Group
 
DiamondFlyer
Posts: 3404
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 11:50 pm

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Tue Jun 04, 2019 5:55 pm

zeke wrote:
DiamondFlyer wrote:
[
A 2 hour extension under FAR 117 has to be agreed to by the flight crew, they cannot be forced to do so


The actual FAA words are “For augmented and unaugmented operations, if unforeseen operational circumstances arise prior to takeoff: The pilot in command and the certificate holder may extend the maximum flight duty period permitted in Tables B or C of this part up to 2 hours.”

Under our regulations only the captain can extend for unforeseen circumstances.

Boof02671 wrote:
FAA rules state for a two pilot crew max duty times are 13 to 19 hours.


Not if you deadhead, basically your rest only starts after the deadhead, or after the FDP, whichever’s later.

“If a flightcrew member engaged in deadhead transportation exceeds the applicable flight duty period in Table B of this part, the flightcrew member must be given a rest period equal to the length of the deadhead transportation but not less than the required rest in paragraph (e) of this section before beginning a flight duty period.“


I'm well aware of FAR 117, as I fly under it. The company *certificate holder* and PIC have to concurrently agree to the extension or it doesn't happen.
From my cold, dead hands
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Moderator
Posts: 4299
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Tue Jun 04, 2019 7:05 pm

EA CO AS wrote:
BravoOne wrote:
atcsundevil wrote:
Discuss the topic or it will be locked. Union discussion isn't related to the topic; it will be deleted, users will be warned/banned, and the thread will be locked. I tried to do this nicely before, but apparently nobody paid any attention.

✈️ atcsundevil


I don't see how you can discuss this without invoking unions??


Agreed; I've let atcsundevil know this already, but the cited article clearly goes down that rabbit hole, making it fair game for discussion:

The incident shines a light on the rough hours many flight attendants have to work, and how airlines tighten up their staffing to keep costs down. Delta was obviously reluctant to bring in another crew to staff the plane, even though the attendants onboard might be overworked.

Flight attendant duty hours are often laid out in a union contract. Delta flight attendants are not unionized, although the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers is trying to organize them, as well as the company’s ramp agents.

The campaign recently became national news when the journalist Eoin Higgins posted anti-union material the airline produced to dissuade workers from unionizing.


Especially since the THIRD post here immediately takes the pro-union bait and went unchallenged by the mods:

Boof02671 wrote:
Hence why they are trying to unionize


Sorry, can't have it both ways, mods - either lock/delete the thread, remove ALL mention of unions entirely, or allow union debate to occur.

The issue is that many of the posts turned into a pro union versus anti union debate, which is NOT related to the topic. That's why some union discussion is left, and it's not entirely removed. I didn't make it as clear in my second warning, clearly I should have, but in my first warning, I made it pretty clear.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15164
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Tue Jun 04, 2019 10:30 pm

DiamondFlyer wrote:
I'm well aware of FAR 117, as I fly under it. The company *certificate holder* and PIC have to concurrently agree to the extension or it doesn't happen.


The regulation does not explicitly say "concurrently agree", that is the practice, as at the end of the day final responsibility rests with the PIC.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
ScorpioMC3
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2019 8:52 am

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Wed Jun 05, 2019 1:40 am

zeke wrote:
ScorpioMC3 wrote:
I never objected to your point of a crew being able to extend. My apples and oranges statement refers to the fact that if you were operating a four-leg domestic day within the US, you do not have a rest period in the middle of the day.


You can do split duties under FAA rules.

ScorpioMC3 wrote:
You cannot compare a situation where a crewmember is deciding he is able to extend during a mx delay when he knows he has a 2-3 hour rest period coming in the middle of the flight to a domestic day where you have already been on duty for 11 hours and have already operated 3 take offs and landings (where the workload is the heaviest) without an intervening rest period.


Under FAA rules it is perfectly legal on a 4 sector day to extend by up to 2 hours for unforeseen reasons like a Mx delay without a rest period.

ScorpioMC3 wrote:
I'm trying to understand this 30 hour day you're talking about. Are you saying that you fly your 15+ hour segment, have a rest period equal to that segment, then turn around and fly your 15+ hour segment back?


I have flown ULH sectors, remain on the aircraft for the turnaround, and deadhead back, its over a 30 hr day. Perfectly legal also under FAA rules.


Yes, I know about the 2 hour extension. I don't understand how that is relevant here.

And that's amazing how you work those ULH flights and turn around to DH back. That would never...ahem, fly... in a pilot contract in the States!
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15164
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Delta Tried To 'Trap' Its Own Flight Attendants

Wed Jun 05, 2019 3:54 am

ScorpioMC3 wrote:
And that's amazing how you work those ULH flights and turn around to DH back. That would never...ahem, fly... in a pilot contract in the States!


Because they had a unforeseen tech delay, 2 hrs is applicable.

That is not normally rostered, last minute standby call.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AA321T, amc737, amdiesen, Baidu [Spider], Chipmunk1973, Clydenairways, dkny, edina, EISPP, Flanker7, GCT64, Google Adsense [Bot], ifIHadWings, jrfspa320, Lifes, marcelh, max999, Ncfc99, Singapore 777, SRQLOT, steman, StTim, User001 and 213 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos