On-call is duty, so itncan be regularly assigned under (c)

New Message Alert

Author: That’s Date: 10/26/2021 7:11:44 PM +0/-0 Show Orig. Msg (this window) Or In New Window

the problem. It is duty, but some employers say it is not - they interpret to their benefit, rather than apply as required. They know they're wrong, just pushing the envelope, which on review can be very steeply expensive in FAA fines.

Return-To-Index Display Full Msg Thread

One more time: FAR 135.267(c) is NOT applicable +0/-2 to 99% of HAA operations! 10/11/2021 11:48:03 AM

One more time: FAR 135.267(c) is NOT applicable +3/-0 Hmmm.... 10/11/2021 12:13:36 PM

One more time: FAR 135.267(c) is NOT applicable +0/-2 To 99% Of HAA Operations 10/11/2021 12:21:59 PM

One more time: FAR 135.267(c) is NOT applicable +0/-5 You nerds 10/11/2021 1:10:08 PM

Four Weeks!! If your schedule changes day to night inside of a 4 week +0/-4 period, you CANNOT use 135.267(c) 10/11/2021 1:56:40 PM

FAR 135.267(c) is NOT applicable +0/-0 GetReal 10/11/2021 2:13:37 PM

FAR 135.267(c) is NOT applicable +0/-0 (b) Just limits The Amount Of 10/11/2021 2:28:39 PM

not quite right. +0/-0 Anonymous 10/11/2021 3:53:12 PM

Youi realize that (b) is the foundation for (d). +0/-0 (b) and (d) are paired together 10/11/2021 3:14:05 PM

There is absolutely no reason for an HAA operator to use (c) anyway +0/-0 None at all! 10/11/2021 3:32:16 PM

I incorrectly said increases from 8 hrs to 10rs, but I meant +1/-0 from 8 hrs to 16 hrs. 10/11/2021 4:19:54 PM

I incorrectly said increases from 8 hrs to 10rs, but I meant +0/-0 You Can Amass 8 Hours Of Flying 10/11/2021 4:54:31 PM

correct, but under (c), you can exceed it in the (NT) +0/-0 24 hour window 10/11/2021 6:31:18 PM

correct, but under (c), you can exceed it in the +0/-0 You Cannot Exceed It Without 10/11/2021 7:04:48 PM

One more time: FAR 135.267(c) is NOT applicable +0/-0 cheap 10/11/2021 8:01:09 PM

One more time: FAR 135.267(c) is NOT applicable +2/-0 In other 10/11/2021 9:07:51 PM

On-call is duty, so itncan be regularly assigned under (c) (NT) +1/-1 Anonymous 10/12/2021 6:03:40 AM

On-call is duty, so itncan be regularly assigned under (c) +1/-1 True 10/12/2021 10:45:22 PM

On-call is duty, so itncan be regularly assigned under (c) +2/-0 Anonymous 10/13/2021 2:37:17 PM

On-call is duty, so itncan be regularly assigned under (c) +0/-0 Yeup 10/13/2021 4:18:25 PM

On-call is duty, so itncan be regularly assigned under (c) +0/-0 Duh! 10/13/2021 9:33:34 AM

On-call is duty, so itncan be regularly assigned under (c) +0/-0 That’s 10/26/2021 7:11:12 PM

On-call is duty, so itncan be regularly assigned under (c) +0/-0 That’s 10/26/2021 7:11:44 PM

On-call is duty, so itncan be regularly assigned under (c) +0/-0 That Is Why The Letters From 10/26/2021 7:26:12 PM