Yawn……typical widget mentality. “Back in my day we didn’t have PSC so you shouldn’t either!” All just mad cuz they decided to move to a base. Get over it PTC boys…..commuters outnumber you.

Setting aside Positive Space, I can probably get along using the jumpseat or grabbing the handful of open seats. My issue is that I went from 8 flights a day pre-covid to 5 now and that has made the requirement for a backup flight untenable. I end up showing 5 hours prior to sign in. Can we at least all get behind just a single flight that arrives some reasonable designated time prior to sign in. There are several other airlines that have this and I don't see how it would negatively affect non commuters in any way

Well if we’re being technically accurate, that’s true. Unlike FAs and dispatchers, the operation stops when a pilot isn’t in place as assigned.

The to/from work S1B fixes most of these issues.

my FOM shows a minimum number of FAs to complete the flight, and also requires an operational control person on the other side of the ACARS terminal. Yours may vary

What???? Where do you get your Information?

Get on the nonrev FB page. There's a lot of shenanigans going on and plenty of reasons to complain. The gate agents aren't consistent. Also, I throw down the S2 card early to see who I'm really gambling with.

Aren’t there a whole group of managers who get unlimited high priority and yearly passes? They must be the glue that holds this place together.

Funniest thing on APC this week!

I can probably get behind this but it shouldn't be the norm to get PS, it should be the exception.

In 2007 I used to have 8 mainline flights per day on my commute by the end of 2008 it was down to 4 RJs. Them's the breaks of commuting. I had to 2 leg it some days and go the night before on other days. I only ever missed 1 commute due to responsible commuting practices.

This is a ridiculous post, it has nothing to do with "Back in my day" and you know it. Nobody has that attitude.

I never had my hotel paid for in new hire training but I'm all for hotels, increased pay and uniform allowance for new hires.

Solution: Earn Skymiles on our deadheads.
Easy to implement.
Program already exists.
If you’re a commuter you can use them for PSC.
If you’re in base, use them for vacation.
Doesn’t put one group vs the other.
Commuter can use them for to work, from work, or both. You make the choice.
Want more Skymiles? Bid DH trips. Those who hate deadheads will get out of your way.

The sound of a mic drop.

The fact you think no one has this attitude means your head is buried in the sand.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ANY little thing that benefits some pilots more than others will create divisions. If it wasn’t PSC, it’d be something else. This just happens to be the flavor du jour.

But wanting to get rid of something that provides a clear benefit to greater than 50% of the pilot group because some non-commuters think their SeNiOrItY has been broached is ridiculous.

Again, the real problem is overbooking, not people trying to get to/from work.

Well maybe no one is an over statement. The numbers are likely few and far between. In my years flying at Delta I can only think of one guy that might be a candidate for that kind of attitude. Then again I'm not flying wide body so maybe there are a few old curmudgeons out there that might exhibit this attitude but by no means would I say it is a popular thought process.

It's 99% about the erosion of non-rev seniority with respect to PSC and maybe a 1% for other ignorant attitudes such as "back in my day".

Airfix

I'm not sure if there are 50% or more commuters among the pilot group is that a known fact? If so what is the source? I'm genuinely interested because I don't actually know the percentage of commuters.

Your statement is worded in your favor and I'd reword it as: "Not wanting to negotiate a benefit for one slice of the pilot group that hurts a different slice of the pilot group."

If we can all come out better than we are right now or if even only one slice of the pilot group (commuters) can come out better without hurting another I'd be all for it. I just don't know what that solution is. It certainly isn't the LOA as written that just expired. There are too many ways to abuse the system. Such as getting positive space back from New York, Atlanta, San Diego, Hawaii (or anywhere other than your nearest home airport) after a personal trip because you have a work trip the next day.

Maybe there is merit in X number of positive space seats per year for each pilot to be used for commuting or vacation travel. That's one of the few fair methods I see of skinning this cat. Maybe there are others.

Here are some of my thought processes for not supporting positive space commuting:

1) Without positive space commuting all non-revenue travel was based on seniority, whether you are going to work or not. It was a level (or maybe slightly sloped) playing field upholding seniority. This forced commuters to make some tough choices if they couldn't book a confirmed jump seat. I'd either go in the day before, 2 leg commute it or plan for one of those very early flights with more open seats planning a nap in the crew room before departure. This means non working non-revs can roll their own dice and hope for no-shows on their preferred day or change their route or day of travel. Notice, we are all treated equally. We are all non-revs no-one better than the rest and seniority is upheld. Nobody ever complained about commuting to work pre-PSC. Well they did complain but it didn't do any good because it was just a part of the job.

2) Positive space commuting benefits one section of the pilot group at the detriment of another. There is no denying that positive space commuting (as well as other items such as load factors and frequency) means less open seats for non-revs.

3) If the failure to commute (without PSC) rate was high enough the company could have an argument to add additional reserves (more pilot jobs) to cover the shortfall. Obviously the current administration like to run hot, so I doubt that would happen but it is a consideration.

4) Positive space commuting on a full flight means that a fare paying passenger has to get bumped or a last minute seat ticket not sold that would have been. Like it or not the company cares about revenue and so should we. We require the company to make revenue so we can negotiate a new contract and share in profit sharing. Granted the numbers are likely small in the big picture. Still, it's a consideration.

I'm sure if the bean counters at HQ see that PSC commuting is a financial or strategic benefit to the company it will come back whether I like it or not.

Until that time I'll continue to communicate to my reps what matters to me for a new contract and I suggest you all do the same.

Airfix

Cool story. Do you have friends?

No show / sick dispatchers can be covered with present dispatchers who share the additional workload.

WBs are frequently staffed with more FAs than the minimum. Extras can be pulled last minute to staff holes (sts), and missed-commutes above the minimum can be left behind. Extra pilots above the minimum are scheduled with extreme irregularity when block limits butt up against limits on some flights like a long turn.

This is correct. I flew with a rather salty FA last month who was the Q position on a Paris flight but rerouted to DTW (The Paris of America of course) due a sick call. The CDG flight just went with one less FA as they staff above the minimum. I remember the SYD attendants throwing a fit years ago when they reduced the 777 FA numbers and yet even the new numbers were above FAA mins.

I have seen ALPA post it a few times that > 50% of DL commute

The chances of using sky mikes when you actually need them to and from work are between zero and 1%.

To add to what Ted said about this, FA’s are also universally qualified. They can literally pull an FA from anywhere.

Your statement is worded in your favor and I’d reword it as: “Wanting to get rid of something that provides a clear benefit to greater than 50% of the pilot group because some non-commuters think their SeNiOrItY has been broached is ridiculous.”

Also, no contractual gain ever benefits every pilot on the list equally. Negotiating something that benefits the majority of the pilot group, and makes their job FAR easier, is a way better deal than not negotiating that thing because you incorrectly think your seniority is somehow broached in the process.

And anyway, not getting a seat while nonrevving is not being ‘harmed.’ Nonrevving is not a guaranteed seat. If you don’t get on, you have lost nothing. You didn’t have a seat before, you don’t have one now. No harm was caused. You’re exactly as whole after the flight leaves without you, as you were before the flight started boarding.

This is the only thing we agree on. The old PSC agreement was ridiculously open ended.

And that’s absurd. Someone’s leisure travel is a higher priority than someone else going to work? That’s stupid. The air line exists to make money. In order for the air line to make money, we need pilots to fly planes. We don’t need cheapskates adding to the aircraft’s gross weight, which reduces our profitability.

Living in base is a choice. Your failure to exercise a negotiated part of the PWA is your choice (if PSC were in the PWA); PSC benefits everyone, you just choose not to utilize it.

Also, being mad about something that benefits the majority of the pilot group (actually it benefits everyone, some just choose not to take advantage of the benefit) when the company knowingly sells more tickets than they can physically provide is silly. They’re literally taking people’s money knowing they can’t provide the service for which they were given that money. They’re gambling that some people won’t show up, which sometimes occurs; sometimes they get caught and they have to pay someone off. Overbooking should be illegal.

If you’re mad about there not being enough empty seats for nonrevving, get mad at the company for overbooking, not your fellow pilots who are just trying to make the company money.

You continue to ignore the fact that it negatively impacts others. You are convinced its just "doesn't benefit" them. Repeatedly saying seniority being honored "is ridiculous" doesn't make it so.

Commuting is a choice, as is living in base. Your sense of entitlement based on your choice "is ridiculous."

You have yet to rationally explain why you think that you are entitled to an empty cabin seat that a fellow employee could non-rev on rather than flowing up to a jumpseat, thus allowing a non-rev employee the cabin seat.

You can look at it how ever you want but the company FOM already says they will bump a non-rev for a pilot commuting to work and possibly a paying customer if needed. They really don’t care about your seniority. The company will absolutely without hesitation book a pilot to work positive space over a non-rev at anytime even on the first flight as long as they don’t have to bump a paying passenger. PSC or not. And I’m betting PSC is back within two years anyway.

I don’t care about someone wanting to go on vacation being a higher priority than someone going to/from work.

I have no sense of entitlement about PSC whatsoever. I’m talking about a hypothetical situation in which PSC were negotiated into the PWA. Utilizing a provision of the PWA isn’t ‘entitlement.’

I’ve never said I’m entitled to a seat, just like nonrevvers are not entitled to a seat. If PSC is a provision in the PWA, then booking a seat would simply be exercising a provision of the PWA, same as the nonrevver.

I always book the JS instead of listing as a nonrev, so more nonrevs can make it on. Also, in your hypothetical scenario (which is false), that employee could list for the JS since it would be open.

When PSC was a thing, it was incredibly easy to book the JS; almost all of them were open. That’s almost a guaranteed seat, it’s far better than rolling the dice with nonrev.

Sounds like we should just do home basing. Then everyone wins.

It is a guaranteed seat to work. If you are bumped by a check airman or the FAA you will be given positive space in the back.

When Alaska pilots commute to/from work they get to use their equivalent of S1 priority and go ahead of leisure non-revs. Why can't we at least do that here?

Commuted for 30+ years. I’ve done plane, train, automobile to get to and from work. I’ve bought tickets, I’ve commuted out of other nearby cities that had open seats. I’ve commuted the night/day before trip. I’ve showed 5-6 hours to sign in and forked over $ for a day rate hotel room. I’ve slept in lounge before sleep room. Had multiple hotels stays on Virginia Ave after missing last Flt home. I got a free room at FA training dorm a few times. I’ve missed primary Flt to work and called skds who would get me a positive seat on my backup no questions asked.Delta was considered a non friendly commuter pilot airline when I hired. So I took a chance and decided to commute anyways and it has worked.
Granted there were times I thought about moving to base due to commute but I made it work. My commute was worth it to me for the hassle.
With that said I don’t think commuting crews should be awarded a seat out of seniority. The pre-Covid vs post-covid flight availability makes it tough, just as tough for the pilots who had their base close in the last 25 yrs. I knew DFW pilots that struggled for years but still made it work.

PSC Vs Medical Insurance
 

Similar at SWA.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

How dare you suggest such a thing? Don’t you know that would abrogate seniority?

It’ll be a cold day in hell before a more junior pilot going to/from work gets higher priority than a boomer going to/from vacation.

I don’t see the company ever giving positive space commuting again. It’s about inventory and revenue production. 40000 employees taking up seats whenever they want isn’t going to happen. Getting to work has always been the employees problem and non revenue travel has always been “just in case” there’s a seat left. Payload optimization and a fattening public aren’t helping. Jumpseats have always been the seats available for commuting and I don’t see it changing. FAs and pilots have seats available to them for confirmed seats to and from work. It worked before and it will work in the future. The company doesn’t care about QOL or ease of commuting when it’s put up against revenue generation.

100% agreed.

Also, I don’t want the union wasting any effort whatsoever on negotiating for PSC.

Id rather see our 6 S2 passes per travel beneficiary turn into positive space passes with the ability to use them as long as a seat is open on travel net. Since pilots would want to save them I imagine most would Jumpseat or nonrev to save their passes for leisure, but they would help the commuters in a pinch.

Thank you for your support. And I don’t want the union wasting any effort whatsoever on negotiating for better medical coverage.

Simple enough right? Somethings you don’t give a flying crap about, some things I don’t.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The company will start PSC if and when it benefits them, not before. If we give things up in order to secure PSC, we will have given those things up for nothing.

It’s not the same for medical coverage. I don’t use Delta’s medical insurance either, but I know that it sucks balls and needs to be improved.

Just to be clear. We already have PSC. You just have to attempt to commute on a prior flight.

You know it to be an indisputable fact that they will book you a seat 100% of the time on your second option?

Indisputable, no. Any time I’ve had to ask, yes.