|
The length you guys go to twist this into something bad is amazing. There is absolutely nothing new that they can do with a 9 hour window vs a 12 hour window. If they wanted more short calls today they could do them. If they want to move your call out up each day by a few hours, they can do that today (and they do). You are still limited by the total number of short calls each month, and by extension the entire base is limited that way as well.
There’s no trade off here. Just because the company decided to do it doesn’t make it bad. |
I don't think we'll see any increase OR decrease in the actual numbers of SC assigned in most categories. What I think we'll see is a change in the start times so that we have a more consistent overlap of SC coverage.
How often do you see more than one short-notice call out at the same time of day (SC window)? I know (because of being on RES quite a bit) in my category that it is incredibly rare to see more than one at a time. That being the case, they only need one "usable" SC per window as long as the overlap is sufficient. But then again, that may just be my category. |
Originally Posted by StartngOvr
(Post 2697538)
Agreed!
Tunes gets it. I think Han Solo is on board too. But, we are clearly clearly outnumbered! :confused: |
This will not change the amount of short calls assigned. When there is bad weather predicted it is not uncommon to have 4 short call people assigned at the same time.
|
Originally Posted by bugman61
(Post 2697547)
The length you guys go to twist this into something bad is amazing. There is absolutely nothing new that they can do with a 9 hour window vs a 12 hour window. If they wanted more short calls today they could do them. If they want to move your call out up each day by a few hours, they can do that today (and they do). You are still limited by the total number of short calls each month, and by extension the entire base is limited that way as well.
There’s no trade off here. Just because the company decided to do it doesn’t make it bad. They acknowledged that the last three hours of SC were almost always a freebie. That translates into, 95% chance of not working an assignment, and taking three hours out of the following day's LC time. Make no mistake about it, there are several reasons they would choose to cut down SC: - Additional LC time as mentioned above - Most reserves don't quite get to the max SC each month anyway, so they will use this slack to assign more SC periods but for less time per period to be more efficient. Efficient in this case means less greenslips. |
This is driven mainly by FAR 117 and the company already recognizes this. We are a data driven company and the current staggered SC times are BECAUSE pilots become unusable in the last 3 hours. Reducing the short call period from 12 to 9 hours does not translate into a need for 25% more SC periods. The company is already covering 95% of the short call need within a 9 hour window.
Can we accept a WIN/WIN scenario or does the company have to lose for the interwebs to be happy? We get shorter SC obligations and more commutable SC periods. The company gains 3 hours of FAR rest and more LC productivity. They also gain scheduling efficiency, by automating the current manual process of early SC release. |
Originally Posted by Gunfighter
(Post 2697570)
We already have staggered SC times BECAUSE pilots become unusable in the last 3 hours. This is driven mainly by FAR 117 and the company already recognizes this. For those who have been sleeping the last decade, we are a data driven company and quantify everything. Reducing the short call period from 12 to 9 hours does not translate into a need for 25% more SC periods. The company is covering 95% of the short call need within a 9 hour window. This could translate into a 5% increase in the number of SC assignments to get back to 100%.
Can we accept a WIN/WIN scenario or does the company have to lose for the interwebs to be happy? We get shorter SC obligations and more commutable SC periods. The company gains 3 hours of FAR rest and more LC productivity. They also gain scheduling efficiency, by automating the current manual process of early SC release. |
Originally Posted by contrails
(Post 2697559)
The information was right in their explanation; you're not thinking it all the way through.
They acknowledged that the last three hours of SC were almost always a freebie. That translates into, 95% chance of not working an assignment, and taking three hours out of the following day's LC time. Make no mistake about it, there are several reasons they would choose to cut down SC: - Additional LC time as mentioned above - Most reserves don't quite get to the max SC each month anyway, so they will use this slack to assign more SC periods but for less time per period to be more efficient. Efficient in this case means less greenslips. I thought it through just fine. While you technically spend 3 more hours on LC, it’s not actually any additional liability. Any trip that you are eligible for on the extra three hours of long call the next day could have also been assigned during the last 3 hours of your 12 hour short call. Take the example of a 1000-2200 SC. If at 2000 they get a 0800 report for tomorrow, they call you and release you from the rest of your short call period for the 0800 trip. Under the 9 hour SC period you are back on long call and get the same trip with the same notice. Also if reserves don’t get to the max SCs today with 12 hour windows, why don’t they assign more SCs now? They have the slack and there’s no cap each day. If they wanted more they could do it with 9 or 12 hour windows. It doesn’t make a difference. |
Even if the likelihood of getting assigned a trip goes down after the 9th hour, it certainly doesnt absolve you of the SC obligation.
The new practice eliminates my leash 3 hours early. Thats 3 hours less of sitting in good cell coverage, 3 hours earlier I get to commute home or exit my 2 hr radius of base, 3 hours sooner I can enjoy a football game without my kiddie straw, 3 hours less I have to drive around with a suitcase in my trunk. Everything isn't win-lose. Enjoy a good thing! |
Originally Posted by StartngOvr
(Post 2697538)
Agreed!
Tunes gets it. I think Han Solo is on board too. But, we are clearly clearly outnumbered! :confused: What I am seeing is a lot of negative speculation, which is fine, but I am not even close to conceding this is bad. As far as more SCs go the last few times I sat reserve I was given SC every single day I was on call - unsurprisingly this changed soon after guys were found to be out of position for SC. And if you do stand 7 SCs you are on call 21 hours less. That is almost 2 full days less of 12 hour SC per month. That is good. :D Scoop |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:39 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands