Originally Posted by
maddogmax
This has been looked at in the past up North.
It was shot down for 2 reasons:
1. The junior, i.e. younger, guys feel that you either fly a full schedule or retire. I happen to agree with this.
2. The companies fixed cost for each pilot remains the same if you fly 1 hr. or 80 hrs.
I am sure there are ways to resolve both issues but it just seemed the majority of pilots did not like the concept
Careful... because the next step down this slope is a monthly minimum required schedule. What do you propose that be? 65 hours... 70 hours? I'm with 767 on this one. I can surmise the reason that it wasn't liked "up north" was that it assumed a stagnant number of pilots. If 767 is correct in his assumption, there will still be a number of pilots required to cover the schedule. If you have a few guys that only fly 20 hours/month, those trips get dropped into the pot and more junior guys can pick them up. If after a period of time, the company sees reserve useage going up, they would have to add more pilots in the category. More captains (assuming the obvious) is good for everybody, no?