Does Carry over reduce RSV line value?
 

With all the carryover on some airplanes, does that reduce the credit of reserve lines?

With less carryover the average would be higher but the lowest lines might still be at 58 or 59. I'm sure it's in the contract but I forgot how it's calculated.

Just another reason to hold suspect the company's true intentions here.

Talk amongst yourselves....

Found it.

Has anyone added up the MD11 carryover?

Any of you MD cats upset about how much more a reserve line would be worth without it?

Not sure what you mean? RLG is based on 96% of BLG. C/O has no impact on RLG or BLG

Don't interrupt his conversation with himself. :cool:

Does the total number of flying hours the company has to fly have anything to do with BLG? Hint: if the bid period started on sunday instead of monday where would a lot of C/O lines go? Maybe into boosting BLG for the "peons".

Think of it this way.

MEM MD Feb bid pack has lots of carry over into March. If there were less, as in broken up by deadheads, the March bid pack would have more hours in it. This would lead to a higher average line. That would lead to more pay per day for the RSV lines.

You are right in that it has nothing to do with the Feb bid pack. But it heavily impacts the bid packs that follow.

I'm the only one that understands what I'm saying. Sometimes myself. Or maybe me.

Wasn't sure if you thought the amount of c/o for a given seat in some way raised or lower the RLG in and of itself.....

Know what ya mean.....

WOW, I never would have known that......

Or, they'd just build more lines, at the reduced BLG.:(

No doubt why else would you write "C/O has no impact on RLG or BLG"

Because it doesn't oh wise one....

Is this a trick question, like what is black and white and used to be read all over?

So when does C/O not help the company by flying extra time at straight pay, helping them to claim we have to many pilots, and allowing them to take trips out of the next months bid pack?

It's a simple question. The title of Gunter's thread was "Does C/O reduce RSV line value" The straight forward and factual answer is what I posted in the context that I took his question. RLG is 96% of BLG. C/O has no value in RLG or BLG.

Take your blinders off and RTFQ before you bring up all the other issues with C/O. Never said a word about it other than the definition of RLG.

If they took those hours and put them into a line it would be calculated as BLG. So I guess it's not C/O anymore then is it? So, just so you understand, C/O has nothing to do with BLG or RLG calculations.

P.S. GUnter even clarified his question and I agreed with him...

Sorry about the confusing thread title.

My contention is CO has a very real effect on line averages when you look at more than one month at a time.

After CO is reduce in the first month subsequent months see a positive effect.

No worries Gunter. Figured out what you mean... Some others could not distinguish the question/answer thing... :)

Kinda like the shoot first, aim later type of thinking.

Gunter, it's kind of hard to tell. If the company used the c/o to bulk up line values, then it would affect RLG, but if they used the c/o to build more lines with similar BLG's, or to fill VTO's, then it would not affect RLG.

Excessive carryover also steals hrs away from the next month.

With 4a2b in effect, the company sees a benefit from actually increasing carryover.

They will also abuse the allowable 13 spread. The spread could be held much tighter.

Single departures need to be smaller or the spread needs to be tighter. Just put that in the same category as no early retirment packages or monthly caps on credit hrs.

I read the question and C/O has a direct influence on BLG. If you take those hours out of this months bid pack and put them in the next months bidpack the BLG for the next month goes up. If BLG for next month is higher RLG for next month is higher. Let us look at the question again "Does C/O reduce RSV line value" I say it does.

But my comments only concerned your statement "C/O has no impact on RLG or BLG". You really think it doesn't O wise one?

Is not either option good for the whole crew force?

WOW nice selective quote on gunter to make it look like you and he agree when it in fact just the opposite.

Hey!! I've got an idea...

How about we leave it as carryover might possibly have an effect on RLG. But, only if they used it to increase line values, rather than build more lines. Otherwise, it would have no effect on RLG.
:p

That way, we can all think you are both wrong.

So just a question. If we land the international mail contract would they use the extra trips to increase BLG or add more lines? And if they are just going to add more lines is that bad?

I prefer to think we are all correct and the company is wrong.

Yes. And, it depends on if they are carryover.:rolleyes:

The company is licking their chops over 4a2b.

It gives them wide lattitude, so they think, to experiment with our lives, I mean lines.

I don't think we have seen the final iteration just the first attempt.

BLG is the average of the lines. RLG is 96% of that. Once lines are published C/O does not impact BLG.

Not talking about what you can do with those hours. Just how RLG is determined.

To simple a concept for you I guess.

Why don't we make all trips C/O, it wont affect BLG and there will be more flying for everyone.

How's that for simple?

That's great idea! We could all have a bunch of C/O and then the Company would not have any trips to build into the lines but we'd still get our new MBPG!

What a concept! Now, since everything is C/O how do you get your BLG average that is used to calculate RLG? Would RLG be 96% of BLG (Not including any C/O because we know that any C/O hrs are not used to get a BLG value)?


This is fun now....

Why not go to 6 week months?

It's accounted for in the contract. It would kill a lot of CO.

Just so we all agree C/O does impact the next months BLG. Less C/O more BLG (and according to your formula more RLG). Obviously they could use it for more lines but than they couldn't tell the arbritrator we are 700 pilots overmanned.

What are you? A schizo? I don't see anyone else agreeing with that.

But, just a question...Did you walk to school? Or bring your lunch?

But if they build more lines rather than higher BLG, then there would be less people having to work 15 days at less than 4CH per R Day and more making the 60CH and working only 10. Of course neither is desired.

I think I got the then's and than's used correctly. :)

You are serious; you don't think pulling trips out of next months bid pack decreases BLG next month? You agree "C/O has no impact on RLG or BLG"? Question why did the company reduce carryover when they were buying up lines? You don't think it was so they would have to buy up less do you?

This is the same old argument going around here for a long long time ....................... we all know that C/O is a Senior privilege and a sham on those that cannot benefit from it .....................................

C/O should be proportionately decreased with line averages, senior privilege or not.

Ever heard the phrase:

"It doesn't matter what you think...If what you think doesn't matter"

That fits your argument. It doesn't matter what you think. Yes, if they used the carryover hours to raise the BLGs...Then, of course RLG would rise. However, if they just used the carryover hours to build more lines, the RLG would not change. It's simple. And, we don't have any say as to which they would do.

You ask if I doubt they reduced carryover to raise the BLGs so they wouldn't have to buy up so much? I don't know. Maybe. But if that's the case, why didn't they just reduce carryover even more and not buy up at all? Pretty simple answer for a few million $$$.

And now that they're not buying up BLGs...What would their incentive be to add those carryover hours to our BLG? They could just build more lines, at the low end of BLG and save even more. We are overmanned by thousands, remember.

Again, the bottom line is that it is possible to raise RLG with carryover, or just build more lines with it.

It is simple, they like saving 200 pilots in the MD, and who knows how many in the other acft when flying is healthy. That is why they refuse to eliminate carryover. It allows them to say we are overmanned now and make do with less pilots in normal conditions. The cost to the company is only positive, the cost to us is some guys get paid 100 hours a month and some are paid 58 a month.

No doubt they can play games with the BLGs and line numbers but if you add lines you increase the need for pilots. If you increase the amount of carry over you decrease the need for pilots. If we started our bid month on tuesday most of our weeklong pairings would become carryover. Good for the senior guys who like to work 3 weeks a month bad for the junior guys.

Regardless of what you, me or "they" think the statement "C/O has no impact on RLG or BLG" is wrong.
Why is the union wasting their time try to reduce C/O if it isn't?

If they took next months carryover and built it into lines then it would not be carryover would it? So, C/O has no value in computing RLG!
:eek:

Yous guys are killen me!! :eek: