|
Originally Posted by iaflyer
(Post 734420)
People may not agree, but I think that improving the reserve system would improve the QOL for all pilots. Why? Because if the reserve system is made better, more senior people would bid it. Then, the entire category junior to that senior guy who bid reserve would essentially "move up" a number and get a better line.
How about this scenario? If the reserve system is made better, I agree that more senior people would bid it. But the entire category junior to that guy doesn't get to move up. Rather, the pilot who was on reserve on the 777B for example, will get bumped off to a lower piece of equipment, when this senior guy bids it. That bumps another guy off, etc. etc. So, in reality, everyone moves down but the one senior guy. Junior guys hosed again! ;) My scenario is just as silly as yours. In reality, when reserve quality of life gets better, it goes more senior, and it just takes longer for anyone to be able to hold even reserve on the bigger equipment. When I was first hired, it took me 8 years to hold 767B. Snap forward to today, and new hires were getting 7ERB. That's not because we were growing; it was quality of life on reserve. We make it much better and everyone their first 5 years will be on the M88B or DC9B. That's fine with me, we just need to realize that's what will happen. |
I understand the concept,and the desire for a "seniority based" reserve system. I've been on reserve for a substantial part of my "career", so I do have a reasonably good frame of reference.
Pre-bankruptcy we had a seniority-based reserve system that, in my opinion, was skewed too far in "respecting seniority". The junior reserve pilots would do most, if not all, the short calls while the senior pilots would put in low slips and do virtually nothing. I prefer a more equitable distribution of the short calls. and indeed the entire reserve workload, for lack of a better phrase. I do not believe that a senior pilot should be able to sit on his (or her) butt while the junior pilots are run ragged. Think of the vacation bidding system. Senior pilots get their choices before junior pilots, but a junior pilot gets to bid his primary vacation before a senior pilot gets to bid his secondary vacation, and so on. That type of rationale appeals to me. The senior pilots do have an advantage, but it isn't way out of proportion. |
Originally Posted by Sink r8
(Post 734453)
What do you want, sweatpants that say "Pilot" on the tush?
Seriously though, I think we can look professional without the hat, bling on the work shirt, and double-breasted jacket. |
Originally Posted by johnso29
(Post 734446)
Well one thing I think would happen is it would reduce the companies flexibility. What you're suggesting is that the company determines how many long call/short call guys they need for the whole month. I don't think they can do that. It won't allow them as much flexibility in the reserve system.
At NW, long call was awarded on a day to day basis but the ratio of long calls to short calls changed on a day to day basis. So how would you determine the amount of short calls/long calls you need each month? On the wide-bodies, some pretty senior guys are finding themselves on reserve due to the longer trips coupled with carry-in, vacation, training etc. Four hours is a 5.3% raise from 75. What would be a fair difference for short call? We’re talking pilots here. It always amazes me what guys will do for a buck. I’ll play the system however it is. I’m just saying I think more choices are better for everybody. |
Originally Posted by BigGuns
(Post 734565)
Talk to your CP. They will get you flying for proficiency... Just ask.
|
Originally Posted by vprMatrix
(Post 734463)
How about the current system with 75 hour guarantee + 1hr pay for each SC assignment. We could even go back to 8 SCs per month. :D
|
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 734472)
I'd like to take a moment and tell everyone that I have shown great restraint in the midst of great temptation- who said deterrents don't work? I didn't want to be banned as the AE results are pending.
But I found some great pictures at peopleofwalmart.com that screamed "juicy pilot" but I chose not to post it. I should get credit for being good. :mad: It was a real good one too. |
Originally Posted by NWA320pilot
(Post 734651)
No they wont...... I tried this earlier this year and I was told that we don't do this at Delta. I went to the CP and pushed the issue but was told "no go". It's too bad as there are lots of guys doing nothing on reserve so they could have just bought a trip from a lineholder with no cost to the company.
|
Originally Posted by Sink r8
(Post 734468)
I'm delighted you would wait to gain some perspective before you run. that's a good thing.
So let's tone it down, and take a step back. Let's also dropp the LARGE CAPS: no sense in yelling. WRT the practice bids at FedEx, the concept as I read it is fairly simply: people would bid differently in the practice than in the final. They'd try to see what everyone else would do in the practice. As a result, when people finally pulled the trigger on a real bid... they wouldn't get anything like what they got on the practice. I think the problem with a practice is that people have no incentive to divulge their true intentions, and no penalty for bluffing. Therefore, practice bids seem to me to make little sense in practice. Conceptually, they're fantastic. They good method I see is for the company to run a few, rapid-succession bids, so that the results are published before training occurs. In doing so, they would not divulge how many bids would occur. Everyone bids truthfully enough, because everyone truly risks getting stuck with their award, but has a chance to try to improve their position in smaller clean-up bids. Surprisingly, that's often exactly how the system works in practice: everyone bids carefully, and hopes they will be able to improve their position later. I will agree that I don't like the fact the company can game the bid by making categories bigger than expected, i.e. by allowing more AE's, not processing all displacements, or even cancelling a bid if they don't like the awards. They seem to have a lot of latitude after the bid is closed. |
Originally Posted by Wasatch Phantom
(Post 734617)
I understand the concept,and the desire for a "seniority based" reserve system. I've been on reserve for a substantial part of my "career", so I do have a reasonably good frame of reference.
Pre-bankruptcy we had a seniority-based reserve system that, in my opinion, was skewed too far in "respecting seniority". The junior reserve pilots would do most, if not all, the short calls while the senior pilots would put in low slips and do virtually nothing. I prefer a more equitable distribution of the short calls. and indeed the entire reserve workload, for lack of a better phrase. I do not believe that a senior pilot should be able to sit on his (or her) butt while the junior pilots are run ragged. Think of the vacation bidding system. Senior pilots get their choices before junior pilots, but a junior pilot gets to bid his primary vacation before a senior pilot gets to bid his secondary vacation, and so on. That type of rationale appeals to me. The senior pilots do have an advantage, but it isn't way out of proportion. There are seniority based rules in the contract they follow for reserve, the only gray area is SC assignment. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:43 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands