Only the specifically mandated tasks required by the various governing regulations, FOM, and aircraft manuals are accomplished.

All the "go the extra mile" BS tasks the Co. likes us to do just for goodwill have been eliminated.

After all, it's just business.....right?

 

Originally Posted by Tummy View Post
I believe you are falling prey to the fallacy of overlooking secondary consequences.

It would be better from a pilot pay perspective for the pilot group if FO's were either not released for OE trips or could not pick up extra time in the footprint of their original trip. Those FO's sitting on jump seats (or at home) would not be available for WS's to cover trips. A decrease in the number of WS's awarded to pilots would increase the number of GS's awarded to pilots. This would increase average pilot pay.

Pilots having to actually stay on the trip would make it harder for commuters to be in position for both normal and WS rotations. This would also increase the number of GS's, and it would increase average pilot pay.

By decreasing the number of FO's available to fly airplanes, it would force the company to hire more FO's. This would make people relatively more senior which would allow them to bid better schedules.

A change like this would change the pilot bidding dynamic. Most people would prefer not to sit on a jump seat for an entire rotation. The LCA trips would not be as lucrative if people could not WS or GS in the original trip's footprint, so LCA trips would go more junior. Instead of the top 10% of FO's being able to jump on the LCA trips, the greater GS opportunities produced by this change would be more evenly distributed among the FO's. This would create less incentive to camp out at the top of a FO category. This would lead to more FO's bidding higher paying positions which would create a greater training churn leading to even more GS opportunities and increased average pilot pay.

Releasing an FO for an IOE trip is less beneficial to the pilot group than forcing that FO to stay on the airplane during the trip, but in order to see that, one must look at secondary and tertiary consequences.


Except many of the LCA trips on narrowbody aircraft go junior. A lot of LCA are junior and get horrible trips over the weekends, which junior FO's get awarded thru initial award. Also, many LCA swap trips after bid awards, and swap into a trip with very junior pilots.

 

The company is looking for productivity gains. That is a synonym for quality of life loss. I doesn't matter if it's LCA trip drops or less sick usage or higher ALV/TLV or some other method the net will be a deterioration of quality of life. Controllability of ones schedule and time off is key in this new environment of training churn and rapid hiring.

I will accept nothing that has the potential to increase my at work hours or the quality of the trips my seniority has earned me. In fact I view the lack of gains in this area a failure.

Vacation availability should be uniform through out the year. Training and vacation should pay equal to trip pay. All pilots should have more flexibility with sick time or a number of paid personal drop days or a flex bank to use like personal time. My working for an airline should actually include travel benefits. A positive space ticket for immediate family members twice a year. Etc. There are many more but you get the point.

 

Perfect example of a "little" QOL issue that I was personally told by a former rep wouldn't happen "that much" was the 00:00 to 02:00 carve out for an additional pay period. A little look at the bid package and I see over 20 pairings with a release between those times. 40 pilots not getting an extra 5:15. 20 pilots not getting an extra day off. I see that as 4 pilot positions given up (2 Capt/2 FO) Thats in only one category in one base.

 

What? you dont get paid for trips that end in a new day? At UAL I look for trips that end around midnite as it means 5 more hours of pay for almost having a whole day off.

 

Nope, up to 2 am is same day. Or 0159.

 

OK I guess. You do realize that it is really cutting your own throat though. Management still gets theirs, and when you drive passengers away it only cuts into our profit sharing. It's a catch 22. I don't know what the answer is, but if that is what you choose to do that is your business. I still choose to help the people that ultimately pay my salary.

standing by for flaming.

 

Wow. Here's to hoping guys like you are the minority, or we truly are eff'd. Management couldn't have written that post any better (for themselves).

Passengers absolutely do not pay your salary. They pay a galactic eff-load more than that, and management scrapes off a sliver here and there to keep the masses only marginally dissatisfied.

No catch 22 for me - the power is in our unity (with exceptions like yourself), but the decision is in the hands of our masters.

 

Scheduled. But if the trip is delayed in the actual operation.

5-G-2 Schedules shall contain a minimum of five (5) hours pay value, averaged, for each day in a Trip. This provision does not apply to publicity and courtesy flights. If a Pilot was assigned or reassigned to be released from a Trip before the start of a day, and if in the Actual Operation he is released after the start of that day but before 0400, that day shall not be included when calculating the pay value in this Section 5-G-2.

 

Picture, arm around shoulder, rep saying it's no big thing. He then starts with "let me tell you about all the new 76 seaters we are gonna allow, gonna grow the market for mainline"