Fx new open time format?
01-15-2015 | 04:17 AM
#12
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 614
Likes: 0
From: B777 Capt
01-15-2015 | 06:06 AM
#13
On Reserve
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
From: Disenfranchised Cost Center
[QUOTE=Overnitefr8;1803414]Company doesn't care who flies the trips. Now they may have something at the bargaining table to offer if we're willing to give up something to get it coded.
Does any suppose The Wolf Pack got gouge on the new Open Time format?????
Does any suppose The Wolf Pack got gouge on the new Open Time format?????
01-17-2015 | 07:57 PM
#18
Line Holder
Joined: Jun 2014
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
From: 11CA
Nothing new
Maybe the new format will now allow a code that a particular pairing is Disputed.
The info is not secret, but it takes some effort to keep up with which pairings are disputed. I would bet some are picked up by honest mistake, which still undermines the dispute process and the efforts of our scheduling improvement team. If there was something like a "DISP" trip type, I bet it would cut down on that happening.
It would also eliminate the "excuses" of some who would flout the dispute process just because a certain pairing happens to suit their personal needs in a particular instance.
The info is not secret, but it takes some effort to keep up with which pairings are disputed. I would bet some are picked up by honest mistake, which still undermines the dispute process and the efforts of our scheduling improvement team. If there was something like a "DISP" trip type, I bet it would cut down on that happening.
It would also eliminate the "excuses" of some who would flout the dispute process just because a certain pairing happens to suit their personal needs in a particular instance.
Several years ago I was looking at Open Time and saw those evil Disputed Pairings marked as DSP or DISP or something like that. There was even discussion on APC (if I recall correctly) about it. Shortly thereafter, BAM, it was gone.
The crew "view" still doesn't include Disputed Pairings but others (Scheduling, Management, etc.) "view" probably has it in there (and probably) always has. A very simple programming change could make it available to the crews, but of course, that would be helpful to the crews, so that will not happen.
01-18-2015 | 05:22 AM
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,931
Likes: 0
Several years ago I was looking at Open Time and saw those evil Disputed Pairings marked as DSP or DISP or something like that. There was even discussion on APC (if I recall correctly) about it. Shortly thereafter, BAM, it was gone.
The crew "view" still doesn't include Disputed Pairings but others (Scheduling, Management, etc.) "view" probably has it in there (and probably) always has. A very simple programming change could make it available to the crews, but of course, that would be helpful to the crews, so that will not happen.
The crew "view" still doesn't include Disputed Pairings but others (Scheduling, Management, etc.) "view" probably has it in there (and probably) always has. A very simple programming change could make it available to the crews, but of course, that would be helpful to the crews, so that will not happen.
The schedulers can absolutely see them. No programming change necessary for us to see them. They just have to turn off the hide function.
01-18-2015 | 06:23 AM
#20
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 4,304
Likes: 0
From: MD-11 Captain
I once proposed at an MEC meeting that "Disputed Pairings" be assigned a "D" code before the number; D386 ... D1763 ... DX254 ...
I was quickly brushed off (by my own union?) and told that Management had absolutely no motivation to do that and that it would NEVER happen!*?
How about if we include it in Contract Negotiations?
I was quickly brushed off (by my own union?) and told that Management had absolutely no motivation to do that and that it would NEVER happen!*?
How about if we include it in Contract Negotiations?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
