Thinking about this only from our perspective isn't right. Because with a midnight departure, no one is going to fly that flight compared to a 9pm. They also need to think of pax and gates.

They would love to ruin us and smear our contract in the mud with terrible trips, but what's the point of doing that is the times don't work for ideal pax loads or gate/landing slots.

Yes because we have the ideal time for pax loads so often? There is a current trip that leaves from Denver to ATL at 1AM. It’s a real gas!

Should we have the greater of the two with calendar day vs rig? Sure. Should it poll near the top? I can’t see why it should. You put a 10% override on redeye and suddenly the problem will disappear.

That DEN-ATL flight is near full every single time. All of my flights are over 85-90% full. Only a few are light loads.

I want to see it alllll. Give me 5:15 min day, redeye override, holiday pay, intl override, etc.

Made the pairing more efficient. Less TAFB. Throw in a redeye override for your troubles.

Every CBA has problems. Just saw a 2 day trip here. Early start, 1 leg, short rest, 1 leg at night (second check in same day), short rest, 1 leg home. 2 day, 3 duties, paid 10:30. Would have paid 15 at NK, because paid per duty, not calendar day. Actually called ALPA, because I could not believe there was no duty pay....
And I honestly would rather do the 2 nights away, because it gives me an extra day at home while everyone is awake, but that might be just me.

Just your 35 hour sit would already pay 10 hours due to trip rigs, so that is not a great example. And at NK you would get an extra duty pay for every layover over 24 hours, so it would pay 15...


Definitely not saying everything was rainbows and unicorns at NK, but the contract had some good things I don't see now. I just don't see the benefits of calendar day, once you take the optimizer into account. I am working a lot harder per credit hour than I used to. And this is the F9 forum, so I will be gone.

Haha. You just correctly countered your own post.

We all want to see it all. We won’t get it all so we must be careful to choose correctly.

Not really. DEN-ATL yeah... But if a flight now is currently at 9pm, seeing it at midnight will most likely be worse, especially if it isn't a west coast - east coast flight. For instance ATL-EWR at 10pm is already about a 50% load, I can't imagine it at midnight instead. LGA and other airports have curfews.

In a perfect world, I wouldn't want min day, because the company wouldn't try to screw us at every chance they get and would make efficient trips for us. But here we are. So yeah, min day is huge on my list.

But this all begs the question, WHY are so few of our trips efficient. We barely have any 3 leg days with over 7-8hrs. 2 days that are over 12hrs. 3 days over 20hrs. 4 days over 25hrs. Company would rather have us fly 2 legs in 3 days and overnight us for 30hrs that do ANY other flying in those windows.

Youve made the redeye harder and the recovery time more difficult. Redeye override I get behind.

If we go to calendar day I can see Denver looking like a fedex ramp at 1AM. Every redeye flight that wasn’t direct from the west coast already just gets routed into Denver for that 1AM push.



To be clear I’m not against calendar day, I can just see ways around it so that its intended effectiveness is reduced and the law of unintended consequences has alarm bells ringing.

I don’t know for sure but my theory is because it risks a higher likelihood of failure. We aren’t exactly an ontime machine so we would start stranding crews all over the place or need to run a higher reserve count.

If true it’s another example of how F9s terrible on time performance costs the company money. All because we won’t pay another ramper $38.

Feed back is good no problem. Every carrier including f9 has the same tafb 1-3.5. No need to discuss that. We need to add in min calendar while at the same time keeping min duty to avoid what you just outlined. That’s what min duty fixed last round.

There is an EASIER and more common sense reason for better pairing construction. Safety.

Anytime there is a late night (local) time departure with a > 18 hour layover and early morning (out station) departure, you have a circadium rhythm swap for the crew. Despite best efforts, we all know how hard it is to prepare our bodies for a redeye flight only to have to start flying the next leg 6-9 hours later than the previous leg. We have been a fortunate group w/ not having an incident based on pairing induced fatigue.

I propose there should be a rule for ALL multi-day pairings that the show times of the days following the first day cannot vary by more than 4 hours. For instance, if a pairing show time starts at noon, the show times for EACH DAY of that pairing following must be between 8am and 4 pm. This would, of course, eliminate odd timed layovers of 24 hours and the need for pilots to try and adjust their rest/sleep habits by 8+ hours within a 24 hour period.

I haven't thought about this, but i would like that. No more 9pm shows working until 2am then being given 28hrs to wake up at 4am for a 5:30 show.

Yep.

LAS to East coast. Monday, 10pm (PST) show. Lands at 6am (EST). Crew gets to hotel around 7am and crashes. Wakes up between noon and 3pm. Eats, hangs out, tries to sleep around 10pm (which is really 7pm body clock time) but can't really. Finally gets to sleep around 2-3am, sleeps for 2.5 hours then awakens for Wednesday, 5am show to fly for 5 hours back to LAS. All 117 legal.

Pay is 10 hours. And the fact that it's very commutable really just makes it less safe (on the front end).

Min Calendar Day will not solve this (as mgt will just move the 1st show time to after midnight).

If more would call in fatigued when they were the data would eventually force them to change the pairing.

fatigued just reading such nonsense