Originally Posted by
Adlerdriver
Lag,
I don't necessarily disagree with the spirit of your recent posts here - The CIC process isn't perfect. It has the potential to allow someone to build a huge CH schedule for the month. Just like bidding to avoid conflict and not protecting mid-days when someone has a large amount of C/O allows them to do that same thing. It also allows someone junior to abrogate seniority by being able to get very senior trips that a senior pilot can't hold during the normal monthly bid.
That said, I have to point out some errors in how you're presenting it:
This isn't how C/O and the CIC window work. Someone with "40-70" hours of C/O doesn't necessarily get to pick up that much +6CH. What they can pick-up is completely dependent on the CH value of the trips that get knocked out by the C/O trip - not the value of the C/O itself.
In the domestic 76 bid pack one day of C/O can allow me to easily pick up a 30 hour trip. A week long C/O can allow me to conflict several trips adding up to 40 hours. I imagine international, particularly th 77 it would be much more exaggerated. I never claimed what you think I claimed. The advantage of bidding C/O isn’t the necessarily the trip you have it is conflicting and getting the trips you want.
I see large C/O trips in all the bid packs. So, what is your complaint here, exactly? ALPA likes what that way?
ALPA, particularly FDX MEC, certainly likes the senior guys being able to conflict and build large credit hour months. Hell I like it and I am ALPA right? It just isn’t a fair way to do it, and it is a very effective work around to the max and min BLG split.
Of course the company likes C/O. Why wouldn't they? As you said, overtime at straight pay. I think any other airline would be amazed at how much of our monthly flight hours come from C/O assigned to the PREVIOUS month's lines. Just another manpower negative aspect of our contractual history that we've allowed and now embraced.
I certainly agree we have embraced it. But I would argue any of our three contracts we could have changed how the conflict window is managed.
This is incorrect. Since the company builds the pairings - they control 100% of the C/O allocation.
You are correct, as I attempted to state elsewhere. C/O is the companies plan to reduce pilots required and increase hours flown at straight time. We, FDX MEC, are the ones who accept pilots being able to build schedules in violation of the intent of our average BLG limits.
Based on your comments, it sure seems like your point, is at least in part, is about C/O.
I went back through a bunch of bidpacks and I could not find a single pairing that contained 80 CH of C/O.
It sounds like you agree with me that C/O is a bit unfair but a fact of life. My complaint remains we make it very rewarding by allowing conflicts to cherry pick the next months schedule. As you said earlier the hours in the conflict are the hours you get to make up. Reread what I said, I didn’t say there were 80 hour C/O I said you can easily add an extra 40 hours by conflicting.
So, what should we do? "Hard" vs "Easy" to make up trips removed due to conflict seems like a difficult metric to enforce. You already mentioned he can do it if the trips are AM hub turns. So, if the trips are relatively "sucky" it's okay? Just not double-DHs to Paris?
How do you differentiate between this guy and someone who ends up with an empty calendar because of the conflict they had no control over? Unless you're advocating capping everyone's CHs for the month, I'm not sure what your solution is. There are no carryover trips that represent a full month's pay. The outliers seem to be in the 70-80% ball park, but there are far more that may leave someone looking at less than a half-month's pay if their month is wiped out by the conflict. Short of a CH cap, how do you make that guy whole while "not making it easy" (whatever that means) for someone with a very large C/O trip remaining to go well beyond "whole" for that month?
Since you asked, if I were emperor I would limit the ability to use CIC to pick up trips that increases your BLG above max BLG plus 6. Anything else would go into your make up bank. You are making way too much of my comment:
It is in the contract and it is legal. We are not in negotiations and Seniority has ruled the industry for 80 years. I don’t really object to carry over other than how easy ALPA helps make it for people to get 40 extra hours a month. Take away the CIC advantage and spread the carry over around. If you want to fly 40 hours extra do it on night hubturns at straight pay.