Date: 202011
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Other Non-Flight
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Non-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Due to COVID and the closure of my domicile; I was on [reserve] lines since Month 2 or Month 3.  I was then furloughed for Month 7 and recalled for Month 8.  My last flight before all this started was on date in Month 1.  My annual recurrent training was on dates in Month 4.  My 90-day FAA currency expired on date in Month 7.  In the first bid after my recall; I was awarded a line that included a trip beginning on date in Month 8.  I contacted my union representative and discussed whether or not I was current.  They showed me the company announcement that involved the XXX day currency extension if a pilot had XXX hours in the [aircraft type].  I [did not have enough] hours in the plane at that time; so I was not eligible.  Over the next several days we stayed in touch and they continued to look into it for me.  On date in Month 7; I contacted Crew Scheduling to inform them that I was not current and could not fly the trip on date in Month 8.  They referred me to Person X to schedule my recurrent landings.  Person X informed me that I was actually current and did not need additional landings due to the fact that 'The FAA extended the landing currency and the hour requirement is being reduced.'  I asked for more information so that I could fully understand the legality of my currency; and they referred me to Person Y.  Person Y explained to me that the company was using latest FAA exemption and that since my landing currency expired in Month 7; that exemption allowed me currency an extra grace month and that I could complete the necessary landings in Month 8.With the report from the company; and after reading the exemption myself and satisfied that I did meet the FAA legal requirements; I proceeded to fly the trip starting on date in Month 8.  I spoke again with my union representative and started to learn that the union was not fully aware of what exemptions the company was operating under or what policies were currently active.  I informed them what I had learned and sent over the FAA exemptions I had read.  I was again contacted by a different union representative who asked for more information about how my legality had been determined.  It is at this time that it was brought to my attention that the company had not made public statements to the pilot group about what company policies were currently being used to determine legal currency requirements for pilots and that my case represented a change that had not previously been announced or made public.  The suggestion was that while I may have been legally current per the FAA; I may not have been legally current under company policy.  I am writing this report to bring attention to this confusing situation surrounding the safety policy of recency of experience.My suggestion for this situation would be for the company to publicly announce exactly what policies and exemptions are being utilized at this time to better inform the pilots of what their legal requirements are; and to prevent safety issues from appearing due to policies that may or may not exist that are not publicly known.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reported confusion about being current under the company's policy as compared to the FAA currency exemptions.