Timely Response to Schedule Requests
 

OK, I know this has been discussed before but it seems to be getting worse. Why is it that when we submit to make a change to our schedule, it takes them hours (literally) to either approve or disapprove the request? Really? Is that the best we can do?

I know that there has been discussion about "real time trip trading". I know that some have said we can't do it to protect "priority make up". Ok...whatever. Even if we keep the human in the loop, can't we as a pilot group demand that requests be processed within a reasonable amount of time? Is this really something that needs to be negotiated or could someone in the company with the title of "manager" just do his/her job and implement a policy. Why does everything need to be so complicated?

I am not talking about right after open times drops. I am talking about your average day. It should not take hours to get an answer to whether or not I can drop a 6+00 hour trip.

Agree 100%

Previous operation had “real time trip trading” via Flica and it was great. The program would just pause all responses for events that required Human Interaction (ie Use of Floating Vacation Days). Otherwise instantaneous response/reply. That method seems feasible here.

It is unfreaking believable to me that the negotiating committee decided for us that we didn't even want to ask for real time trip trading, even though the pilot group had clearly stated that we wanted it. Didn't want to mess up priority makeup or bother to explore alternate solutions. This is something that clearly affects the vast majority of pilots quality of life and should be a no brainer.

Or just make it a standard window. For example, after the intital trade is made, it will hang in open time for no longer than 30 minutes.

You can call scheduling and give them a little poke. Tell them you have a request pending and ask if they can take a look. All they do is basically hit "go" and consent to let the computer process the request.

From my interactions with them, it seems like the pending requests are something they need to check periodically to see if there are any. Often times, I get the impression they haven't done that for a while perhaps due to workload or they just don't care.

The priority excuse makes no sense to me. Schedulers don't call everyone with any amount of priority M/U time available and ask them if they want the trip before they process a basic trade or m/u request. Those with priority who have put in requests at that point get them processed ahead of those without it. But the requests themselves are all automated. It's not like the schedulers are doing anything other than consenting to process what's there in the cue. Whatever is in the cue gets processed at the whim of whoever is on duty. They can (and have) done it almost immediately after I put in a request while other times it takes hours. There's no set period they're required to wait in order to avoid disenfranchising someone with priority time available. So, if we get a scheduler who is quick (or we call and pimp them), how is that any different from real time trip trading? Plenty of trips go to routine general M/U requests because those with priority simply didn't know about them.

Been here 10 years and have never had PMU, but have had hours and hours of waiting to hear back on a trade. Why do we inconvenience 99% of the crew force to enable the 1% to get a slightly better trip?
And to bring the VRB into the discussion— when flying extra begins to be a key part of your Retirement, do you think the Company will not influence who gets what in the schedule adjustment process?

Stop using common sense..

But hey.. they decided that we all want this VB turd and they are going to educate us why... :eek::mad:

Why do trades, drops, etc require a human to process? Especially if that human is just pushing a button that begins the computer process?

Control....:mad:

I have called the schedulers during slow times to ask them to process my request. Such as when I look at open time and I’m the only one asking to swap/drop a trip after waiting 20 minutes. I haven’t had an issue with them refusing. If you’ve waited a while I’d just call. They’re usually very accommodating.

That’s all fine, but it shouldn’t be that way. The system needs to be changed. Calling scheduling to process a trade should not become a norm. What if you’re not in a position to call?

But if they are just pushing a button for the algorithm to do its thing, how is this control? Or are they actually looking at it and making sure it meets regulatory and contractual limits?

I always thought, "denied, insufficient reserves" was the closest button they could click.:D

Seriously, during ground school, we should get a tour of the scheduler's office and some information on exactly how the trip trade system works, and why it sometimes takes so long for them to push the button.

This times a thousand percent!

It's control only because it's completely up to them when the process finishes. All the contractual and FAR legalities are programmed. They are simply a bottleneck in what could otherwise be a completely automated system.

I guess, but I don’t see what anybody gains from it other than annoyance from pilots. That seems counterproductive. If the contract and regulations are already programmed, then the trade will be denied or approved either way.

Agree 100%. I believe the schedulers have the ability to intervene and influence the outcome of a request for better or worse if it suits them (although they'll deny it).

Otherwise, they are completely irrelevant to the process. They just consent for the system to process the request in accordance with the programmed contract/FAR constraints. It's not like every scheduler is pulling out the contract and FARs to check for duty limits, 30 in 7, etc. every time someone puts in a BLA. This is obvious when you call them and politely give them sh!t for taking 6 hours to get around to hitting "enter" on your general m/u request. You tell them the request is there, they look, say "oh, let me process that for you" and 10 seconds later you have your answer.

What a concept. I don’t think you are saying this is the way “it should be”. And I’d agree. But I do think you are pointing out the advantages of being proactive within the confines of our contract. It’s clearly not perfect. Or even close. But submissively accepting victim status is a choice. So is picking up the phone and pushing the process. As a group, we need to get better at the latter.

Of course not. It should be real time trip trading. But our senior negotiators who probably haven't put in a BLA in a decade or even checked open time decided our desires didn't merit any effort in this area. Priority time my ass. A fifth grader could have fixed that problem with a couple of CBA sentences.

So, it is what it is. I'm certainly not going to fall on my sword and not pimp scheduling when I want them to get off their ass and empty the trade cue because it shouldn't have to come to that. It's BS that we have to go to those lengths but we're the only ones who are going to suffer if we stand on principle over that.

So when we call and ask them to process the request, is it done in order or do they skip to your request and process it before someone else who might have submitted a request for the same trip?

I hope it is done in order.

So supposedly they can't go out of order, however, I have seen some shenanigans as far as the sick time release.

For example, holding a trip back and not putting it into open time, that someone called in sick on until I called and asked (20 min after the other sick trips went into open time). And then magically earlier time stamped, because perhaps they released the trip and input someone immediately in for it from the scheduling desk? Same pilot, both times. And one time it was during a sick footprint for him, so he had to have put it in makeup sick, not priority makeup, which I don't think gets you any priority over regular makeup.

The latest.....removing someone from a trip early (before 7am Memphis the morning prior) after they had called in sick, to assign the trip to an R24. Unless the last contract changed, I didn't think they could do that unless it was over 120 hours TAFB.

But I don't call scheduling and harass them about it. I doubt it would change the trip assignment in any way. However, it does give me something to complain about.:confused:

Was it a long trip? More than three day trips go in two days prior. If what you said was true what if you called in well before 7 and said where is my trip?

The other method to process trips trades is to have a set time each day that trades are processed, like every 4 hours....6am, 10am, 2pm, 6pm, 10pm, etc... That way you know or at least you've got an idea of when trips would be processed. Date/time stamp would start over after a period is processed. And another option would be to process PMU requests immediately upon receipt but, as we currently see and practice, that's left up to the individual scheduler.

I'M NOT ADVOCATING THIS METHOD, I'm merely saying that this is an option.

That is the way DL does it. If you’re senior it’s great, if you’re junior then it isn’t so great.

-UA

Negotiate and eliminate SUB and I’m all for more timely trip trading.

Would suck to lose the ability to turn a 6 hour trip into a 7.5 hour trip, but hey, a vocal minority on the Internet wants it so what the heck.

It’s been my experience that processing is rapid during Sick Window bazar and Timely if there are trips in the Assignment window, less so for BLA’s days/weeks in the future...but do I Really need to know if my M/U request for next Monday was approved within 5 minutes?

Life Moves pretty fast. Put down BidX or FxCal for awhile or you might miss it

And, once again surprised that the thinking is different.

That our NC could easily fix the OTP conundrum with simple contract language yet there’s no way the NC could write language to create the VB plan.

No bare bones..VB will be a 5% hurdle rate, 2% floor, based on the same IRS limits the B plan is, similar language to continue accruals if the IRS limit is ever modified

That would be a vocal majority who want real time trip trading, not a vocal minority. It would be a simple fix to get real time trip trading, and keep 125% pay for your OTP trips, just without the priority. I'd be happy to get rid of the priority in the first place....nothing like scheduling sitting on your makeup request for hours when you saw you put in for it first, and still getting earlier time stamped by a PMU.

No, it was not a long trip. And it's trips more than 120 TAFB that go in two days prior, not three day trips or more.

And yeah, if they took it from you early, what would happen if you called and said "where's my trip"? I'm assuming you would get it back, however, they should not assign trips before they are supposed to be available, just because they want to utilize R24's.

The risks are far different.

One issues affects how we make small, medium or large adjustments to our current schedule (YMMV)

The other affects how we ALL earn our retirement over the next 15, 20, 25, 30 years.

...and then how that retirement pays out over another 10, 15, 20 or 25 years.

While I'm an advocate for Real Time Trip-Trading or at least, Specific Trip Processing Intervals (...every 15 to 30 mins), I'm certainly willing to strike a deal.

The company can keep their "control" over trip trade processing, if I can keep my current A plan.

The risks and consequences from negotiating any changes in these two areas differ greatly.