Originally Posted by
e6bpilot
I am also not a huge fan of flying 4 days, but they come in handy and as a pilot group, they greatly enhance the amount of cheddar that we collectively bring home. Here are my top 2 four day trip usages -
1. Vacation pulls (or any kind of nonfly pull) is generally greatly enhanced by 4 day pairings.
2. As a commuter, I fly quite a few open time 4 days. Nobody wants them, but I’ll gladly fly then for the extra pay and they regularly go PP or DT. 4 days for 55-60 tfp? Sign me up.
There are also some weird long TAFB trips that go places that pilots don’t mind going to and are built with deadheads or redeye legs. While I don’t often fly these, they seem popular when constructed correctly and one man’s trash is another man’s treasure around this place. The Hawaii redeyes with the last leg as a redeye or DH are still extremely popular.
Where we went wrong was adjusting APL and mandating turns and 2 days without putting guard rails on it. Now you have a ton of high blocking 4 days that nobody wants and turns and 2 days randomly thrown into lines full of 3 day pairings. There are still the same amount of pure turn lines as there used to be, probably less as a percentage of pilots. Meanwhile, as a commuter I commonly get a Saturday turn that I can’t get rid of and end up working it into an elitt situation.
I get it, our SAC guy management wannabe has a genius level IQ and is doing us all a favor, but this is the favor nobody asked for or wants.
I'm not a huge fan of them either. They do serve a purpose but their a lot of pilots that prefer the smaller trips. I can't stand turns and two days but many guys love them. Commuter vs living in base, dense trips vs rig trips, turns vs four days, two vs three days, etc. That is just on the planning side of things. When you factor in daily ops with PP or VDT, each can be very lucrative if you play it right. No doubt about it. APL was adjusted because the majority wanted shorter trips. Two days to be specific. Since the keyword in APL is "average" that means on the other end it causes a consequence.
Almost half of the flying schedule has reduced days. That is deliberate by network planning. The majority of aircraft now are 175 seats which creates in aggregate longer turn times. That also makes problems in available duty to stuff the flying in. Throw in RE's and longer stage lengths too. That cause has a great effect on every single pairing. SWAPA's rigs, duty day limitations, max work days per month(planning side), etc are great. All create a push/pull on the pairing generation. Satisfying almost 12,000 pilots with13 domiciles is quite a task already and most of the rigs and limitations that are in place were built on an airline that no longer exists in its hey day. The company has the upper hand on this because they create the flying. CBA's are usually are a reactive document to protect at least try to make QOL as best as possible for all. It's early in the process of polling and SEP. Hopefully the group doesn't skip the process because it truly is the only way NC can get an idea of the wants and the must haves.