Originally Posted by
NotMrNiceGuy
I want to take a moment to clarify a couple of things. The first is that I’m not trying to broach this topic for the current round of negotiations. I’m just trying to understand its place in our system historically. I do think it might make sense to address going forward in the next round.
Secondly, I think there has been a bit of false dichotomy regarding the costs and trade offs. When applied to our lines, a continuous TAFB system can be more than a “few shekels”. And it doesn’t apply to per diem alone.
If you go take a look at the April 2026 lines, there is a pure RDU day flying line on the 76. The week is made of front and back end DH’s. There is one week that doesn’t have a BEDH. Total TAFB currently is 322:31. Currently, it pays 94:57. If you didn’t break up the TAFB, it would be 385:42. That would credit 102.85. That’s 7.9 hours for the month. Not including per diem.
The line has 19 days on in a 35 day bid period. The current book comes out with an average daily credit of 5 hours. Compare that with the continuous TAFB pairings and the average credit goes to just over 5.35. That’s competitive with the industry which has an average daily guarantee credit of 5.25 hours.
Lastly, I think there’s a misconception of the tradeoffs. You don’t lose any flexibility regarding swapping schedules. Swapping out legs departing a base and returning to base has been going on in the industry with continuous TAFB pairings for pilots for more than a decade. Mentioned earlier, jetway trades are proffered on a trade board just like they are today. You just select which legs you want to swap or drop and the trade board does its thing. There is no trading shekels for flexibility.
As a matter of fact, it can enhance flexibility as some carriers can let you drop the last leg to base if you can find a pilot that will take the trip from an outstation back to base. That could make commuting to base much easier if you can operate in to work.
Again, just trying to have an honest discussion and see if there’s room for improvement.
The pay difference you mention is only true for our current contract. With the changes in MPPDP that were agreed to according to the NC comms and the scheduling comm, that month of RDU hub turns would now pay 98:09 if that TA passes. Yes, that is short of the 102.85 that you came up with for a total TAFB, but it is an improvement.
As Adlerdriver said, there is also a lot of flexibility that you would be giving the company by not ending a trip when you returned to base. That month of flying would be 4 trips instead of what it is now. Let's say that they change that last day to an airbus, now you would be put into sub, and get to decide to go home early, or take whatever sub assignment they gave you. If that was all one trip, they could just do a schedule change and send you wherever they wanted.
Another situation that doesn't come up often, but does happen is the snow or other weather events in MEM. Let's say one of those happens in MEM one of those weeks after your deadhead to RDU. Now, if they cancel the flight to MEM for a few days, you can decline SUB for the trips that are affected while you are stuck in RDU and get overage. If it is all one trip, you get nothing extra.
As Adlerdriver pointed out, there is a great potential for unintended consequences in order to capture a few more hours of pay by making a series of smaller trips into one big trip. Given the company's recent history, is that something we should take a risk on?