Originally Posted by
Easyflier301
Great question for the road shows. This is what was relayed last night on the PHL/BOS/LGA town hall. None of us were at the table, so we are just speculating at this point. My understanding is that yes, split duty was a give that APA gave anticipating some pilots would like them and bid for them in order to get AA to lock in trip construction limits. Who knows how that discussion played out when it came time to talk about 10 hour FDP.
My point is, DAL doesn’t have the trip construction limits that we have proposed in our TA. That’s a fact. So the company (and optimizer) has a lot more leeway to get productivity when the 10 hour day goes into effect.
APAs position (again, per the townhall) was that the company said at the negotiating table “you want DAL/UAL language? Fine, then you need all of it.” It’s probably safe to assume that meant eliminating the trip construction limits they had already locked in. APA wasn’t willing to go there on some things…this being one, and reserve days off /85 hour cap being another.
For better or for worse, the road shows will provide context to why things were negotiated the way they were. Until then, we are mostly just guessing.
The optimizer has no limitations right now on trip construction. Since the TA language has come out data shows that almost every NB bid status is already meeting the new proposed construction limits. We need to negotiate some wins. As is without the 10 hour rig the company is going to be able to build the same amount of 4-5 day trips they always have
AND also build split duty. O by the way, the split duty trips are going to eat into the min % of 1-2 day trips from the sequence limits.
The company(rightfully so, it is their job) is negotiating for a neutral outcome on anything that would "benefit" pilots and selling it as a win to us. On the other hand they are getting massive productivity gives on things that benefit them( ECS, split duty, RA into day off, catch up flying, etc).