Originally Posted by
FDXLAG
Maybe, I could argue the vacation provisions in the VTO language will result in more vacation utilization not less and cost the company 21 more pilots per year. Like sick days, a guy who saves vacation is going to save vacation. But what if I need a week off next month and only 6 lines let me bid around it. I put VTO as choice number 7 and add some unplanned vacation.
A very good point.
Pilot behavior is very hard to cost or predict.
But, right now secondary line holders use 100% of their vacation. So the company has no where to go but up as we are already at a limit.
The possibility of increased vacation use is someone who bids VTO solely to be able to use vacation days where he had no vacation before--to get days off that are critical to him. Note that for your assumption to work (to use more vacation than planned) he would be VTO/VAC employing where he had no vacation previously. But, he would still have his full vacation in other months. He would either have to go negative or balance out by avoiding vacation use in normal bidding or in another VTO month. So, I don't see vacation use as increasing much and much more likely to decrease.
Last, no matter what we think about vacation usage, I think everyone agrees that 20% of reserve lines removed from the bid pack means more numbers of VTO lines than we have currently to fill the void. And, PBS/VTO is more efficient in scheduling pilots so big, big gains in the hundreds of millions of dollars to the company by pilot staffing avoidance.
Having fun with the give and take. Keep it coming!