I've never pulled the trigger on a GS while on LC. Just, well, it'd have to be the right situation and none has been offered. I'm weary of the DH'd to the overnight and then start tomorrow, that'd be the GS I get.

I guess it could work if you're on LC today but going into XX days then you could make a 2+ day trip all premium pay.

I'm also trying to figure this out, say the ALV was 72 hours. You get a 4-day GS... seen it on the 88 last year, but it was 1 leg ATL-JAN and on day 4 1 leg JAN-ATL. You'd get pay and credit up to the ALV but just pay after that with no credit, that 4-day just became what... 2-3 or so hours of pay? At first I thought WOW, awesome but now that I look at it again I don't think it was a great trip to get.

And that's why we need 5:15 per DAY, not duty period. Or at least some soft pay for calendar day layovers to stop unproductive trips.

I agree, that would be huge. That right along with SC raw score credit. I mean right now you can have a 2-day trip with a regular Captain and reserve FO and one makes 20 hours and the other 2, both on a GS.

for a moment let me go back to 1.5>80 vs GS... I'm not being a moderate for the sake of peace but I can see the advantages to both depending on where you sit.

However, after looking at it the system that produces the greatest number of pilots and faster movement through the system is preferable to me. When it comes to pay it has to be done on the pay tables in the sense that you don't accept lower pay and say it'll be made up with premium or overtime flying system wide.

But rather you accept a system that will have more pilots on property making a higher wage on less work in comparison to the other system and very very high wages whenever they work more than the average.

I don't care whose system it is, I really just want max numbers of pilots, mass movement and a higher base pay to the potential of fewer numbers, less movement and variable pay for senior pilots. So for now GS system I guess, although it'd be fun to have a system that provided more consistency in premium pay such as a 1.5>80 (with no cap) but I'm not senior enough to hold a line after such a system was implemented and therefore, from my point of view, I wouldn't prefer it over the other.

Also, if a reserve pilot is over the ALV on hours flown then they should get 2X pay for any GS above the ALV as at that point you've become equal in workload with a regular pilot.

AMR is having the same issues also.

I'm unclear on the value of higher numbers of pilots. If the company will pay $X to employ a pilot group, doesn't fewer pilots = fewer people to divide that pot?

True, except you're forgetting the pay bump that comes with advancement.
Some of that "higher number of pilots" will be in categories above you.

If the new contract has work rules that require 250 captains to operate the 747 fleet instead of 225 captains, then everybody moves up.
And so on and so on across every category. You upgrade to bigger equipment or left seat earlier in your career.

IRT keeping fences for the Whale, unless something happens in the next four years to change the amount of 777/747 slots, I wouldn't be surprised seeing FO on the Whale hitting 5 digits on the list for some fNWA pilots. The math is very easy. You have less amount of fNWA pilots competing for 747 slots, some fNWA pilots who won't commute to reserve (esp if there is a higher, changing reserve percentage throughout the year), and some fNWA that can't bid it due to a current seat lock. If the numbers stay the same, keeping the Whale fenced is a no brainer.

Ok, let me read this back to you. I never took statistics, so feel free to correct me on my math. For the sake of this example, let's compare a 12,000 pilot group to a 15,000 pilot group.

a = total, company-wide pilot pay (lump sum)
b = number of pilots
c = pay per pilot.

When a/b = c, increasing b decreases c.

That means that for *all* the Delta pilots, as a group, increasing manning reduces pay. For simplicity's sake, let's posit that each additional 1000 pilots reduces c by 7.4% (1000/13500). If that's the case, then you're saying that you're willing to accept a 7.4% decrease in pay for that next level up (bigger plane, better seat) in order to get to that level more quickly.

In other words, by diluting the value of the more lucrative seat, you create more to go around.

NOTE: This is not an argument for scope relaxation, as that's a bedrock job security issue for those already on property.

As a senior North pilot the whale is the only place I can go and not feel the direct impact of over 500 South pilots hired after me who were placed ahead of me on the combined seniority list. The fences were put up for a reason, and they are an integral part of the seniority award. Talk about removing the fences is a waste of time. It won't happen.