8:00 vs. 14:15. Hopefully people will use that info to make informed decisions in the future. Keep ignoring what voting down the adtg has done like you always do.

 

Not sure what you have been looking at but i haven't seen crap for start late end early that is worth my time or gets me done early enough to get home.

 

Because pilots don't partial the heck out of trips like they use to. If a 3 day FAI trip existed with a turn on the front. I can almost guarantee someone would partial pick up the portion that started SEA-FAI and then get paid 14:15 for flying two legs.

MSP would see a lot of 3 and 4 day trips turn into 14:15 3 days after pilots partially picked stuff off of it. Now it is worth 12:00 for a 2 leg 3-day, but it was worth 14:15 under the adtg.

 

Are there any other current examples where the adtg would have been better? Or is it JUST the Fairbanks trips?

 

Well, there was another example in the quote I gave you.

The only time the 4 hours of pay for a non-working calendar day would pay more would be if a 4 day had a non-working calendar day and paid more than 15:00 with the min duty and leg by leg credits. (adtg would make it 19:00). However, you can see a 4 day worth 16:00 now, or even 12:00 if it incorporates a FAI type layover. Again, with the adtg, it would have paid 19:00. Same concept with 3 and 5 days that have a non-working calendar day.

Basically, only high credit 4 days with a non-working calendar day would see a gain, and those few trips go senior. The adtg helped everyone, reserves all the way up to even senior pilots. It paid SAN turns 4:15 instead of 4:00, 5:19 with the PPW instead of 5:00 now. It paid 2 leg 3-days 14:15 instead of the 12:00 we see now with a non-working calendar day, and 8:00 with a FAI layover.

We also weren't losing adtg credit when we partially dropped turns off our trips. Our contract has us lose min duty credit when we dropped turns, but a bunch of us were dropping turns to other pilots (who benefited from the adtg credit) and worked short 4, 3, and 2-day trips worth 19:00, 14:15, and 9:30, where now they can pay as little as 10:00, 6:00, and 2:00(2-day SAN layover where you dropped everything but the SAN legs would pay 9:30 under adtg and now will only pay what the 2 flight credits are worth).

Just food for thought if this pilot group is ever lucky to see a adtg offer in the future.

 

Anyone heard anything about new destinations? I know we are starting SNA in March or May

 

If you would reread my post it says the AIRPLANE quick turns.......much different than a crew quick turn.

 

404yxl,

The company will always adjust pairing construction to limit their costs...they will never make them "pilot friendly" as long as it adds one more red cent to their costs. To look how the ADTG would have benefited the pilot group the last 6 months is apples to oranges. The company would have modified the pairing construction to limit their costs.

There still is an outstanding grievance going through arbitration. The ruling should be coming out soon regarding only receiving min day for a duty period. ( 5 day trip, only 4 duty periods, only 4 days pay) If the arbitrator rules in our favor, the pairing construction will have to become more efficient thus creating better pairings for the pilot group. I personally believe the ADTG program was just a shor term carrot and stick the company wanted to dangle in front of the pilot group to sign up for and lock in savings. Ya I agree it was nice for a decent amount of the pilot group, but if the arbitrator rules in our favor on this issue the entire pilot groups pairings will dramatically become more efficient, thus making our regional airline lives a bit easier to bare.

hope I didn't come off in a negative way, just my opinion that's all

Finally cold enough to go fishing!
Fly Safe!

 

I get all that. The question I'm asking is this: Are there any other current pairings/city pairs/out and backs/ turns/ flights/schedules (besides SEA-FAI-SEA) that would be paid at a higher rate IF adtg was still used like it was previously?

I won't waste my time pouring over the bid packets to find out for myself so I was hoping that someone would know that answer. If so, is the pilot group, overall, hurt by the new 4hr min day?

 

To call the pending grievance outstanding is offensive to the word outstanding. There is no way we win the grievance, the wording is pretty clear in the contract and 404 was even telling us prior to the vote we would see trips pay like this. I voted to keep the 445 and would take it back if it was ever offered back up to us.

Also you are right when you say the company will always adjust the trip construction to limit cost, so why we opt to take 4hrs instead of 445 for a starting point in constructing trips I do not know.