Originally Posted by ACEssXfer (Post 3927103)

I made this exact point later in the post. We allegedly have industry best trip construction limitations and were told during negotiations/road shows that the company was pretty much already operating on the razor's edge of those limitations. APA said we weren't necessarily going to gain much but it will protect from later abuse.

If they are already operating right at the limitations how are they just going to add more days? They can't................Right?

If they can't add more days the optimizer will be fighting with itself between ACD and >10. This is what we want. That all relies on the fact that APA wasn't blowing smoke up our ### during section 6.

Originally Posted by joepilot50 (Post 3927112)

At least per APA, company is willing to give us the 10 hour rig, but they want to readjust those construction limits( assuming allowing more 4-5 day trips).

Originally Posted by ACEssXfer (Post 3927107)

Yes and I disagree with your take on "excess" reserves. Lowering the LCWs will absolutely add more lineholders by spreading the same amount of block hours over more pilots and reduce reserve staffing. This is the same argument I had with APA during covid when we were trying to avoid being the only legacy to furlough. I was told it "had tentacles in too many parts of the contract." What they meant to say was "IMAXers will be angry with a lower window."

With that lower LCW if you want to work more its a few clicks away as long as they leave VMAX at historical levels. If you want to work less you already are, based on less hours awarded in PBS.

I wasn't calling you Mr APA. It was a hypothetical conversation that I apparently didn't articulate very well.

Originally Posted by tallpilot (Post 3927114)

This seems to be the tenor of the discussions on the APA forums. The IMAX take is stop complaining about bad schedules and crappy months, just figure it out and get 2-4 months off (but instead of enjoying the break, pick up premium so you can brag about how much money you made).

So your life sucks on reserve but once you can finally hold a line (top 60% or so) then figure out how to IMAX and life will be good.

Maybe that's right but it takes a while to get out of the bottom 40 so I'm not really enjoying my QoL. Which again is the point of this thread. There isn't much flexibility on reserve and even less when you are very junior.

Originally Posted by WiFly (Post 3927113)

I don't buy it. The analysis they were flouting seems flawed. Could be true, but we definitely need to do a deeper dive before we write off the 10 hour rig. 10 hour rig would add a ton of credit during IROPS.

Originally Posted by ACEssXfer (Post 3927107)

Yes and I disagree with your take on "excess" reserves. Lowering the LCWs will absolutely add more lineholders by spreading the same amount of block hours over more pilots and reduce reserve staffing. This is the same argument I had with APA during covid when we were trying to avoid being the only legacy to furlough. I was told it "had tentacles in too many parts of the contract." What they meant to say was "IMAXers will be angry with a lower window."

With that lower LCW if you want to work more its a few clicks away as long as they leave VMAX at historical levels. If you want to work less you already are, based on less hours awarded in PBS.

I wasn't calling you Mr APA. It was a hypothetical conversation that I apparently didn't articulate very well.

Originally Posted by joepilot50 (Post 3927139)

Delay pay maybe the one to chase if you care about IROP's which is something the optimizer can't figure out how to minimize.

Granted who knows how that will change crew tracking behavior in when they decide to cut you lose for the day or push you into a day off as that is deemed cheaper.

This is the kind of discussion that meeds to be had vs just pointing to Delta and going, " We want that"

We ended up with ACD that way. Granted it had its benefits, but it absolutely sucks to have a great 13-14 hour 2 day which delays or pushes you into a third day and all you gain is an extra hour of pay for that lost day off......

Originally Posted by tallpilot (Post 3927154)

That's what I want to see. Expand the after midnight pay to include any delay that results in returning to base more than 2 hours after originally scheduled. Beyond 5 hours then it's an extra day. I don't mind helping out and they can't control weather but it doesn't mean I should do it for free. My inconvenience is worth compensation.

Originally Posted by ImSoSuss (Post 3927206)

Edit: Misread your post however keeping below posted as a possible compromise with the company about the two hour after midnight pay provisions.

I understand the company's concern. They are worried about people slow rolling it if the arrival is scheduled before midnight but slow taxi, pull over to get new numbers, fly mach .74, etc to try to get an after midnight arrival. I think a good compromise is to have scheduled after midnight, unscheduled after 12:30am. No mater what we already get the extra duty period if arriving late enough to push debrief to 2am so only the 2 hour pay provision would be adjusted.

Originally Posted by CRJCapitan (Post 3927316)

Or anything "actual" could be determined off of the flight plan/newly posted arrival time. If you push at 9 PM and the flight plan says 3:15 from start of taxi out until end of taxi in, then you get the add pay. That way the outcomes desired by the company and the pilots (get there as quickly and safely as possible) are aligned and pilots get compensated for the inconvenience.