Na these are not that different- You're just looking more closely.
Take another look.

LGB and MCO are the bases that were crushed by this CBA. LGB had an increase of 500% 4 and 5 day pairings with a redeye. They went from 161 one day pairings to 61. They dropped from (158) 2 day pairings to 30 this October. They have 59.9% of their pairings are 4 & 5 days with 95.4% of those having at least one redeye. Any way you slice it, it still stinks.

Didnt we also just stopped a ton of intra California and west coast flying. The entire schedule changed out in LGB.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

No. It's the CBA's fault. Just like ATC and our delays.

Frankly, I'm in a large base and there are often 0-2 of the 4-days I like to bid for most weeks. So I welcome SOME additional 4-days to choose from.

What we know for SURE is that our pairings beat DAL, UAL, and AA. They are industry leading thanks to our industry leading scheduling.

Just ask B6ALPA. :rolleyes:

That email from the Scheduling Committee this morning says it all

"the company built the October pairings with the singular purpose of producing the least expensive pairing set possible"

"(bidding reserve) could be a viable strategy in light of the relative characteristics of the pairings"

They also warned that there may be so many people bidding reserve for October (because of how bad the pairings were) that some folks may not be able to hold reserve.....

That's what you'd expect them to do, right? I'd also expect that our union would have anticipated this, done some modeling during negotiations to mitigate "unintended consequences", and build language into the contract that would limit the negative affects of the resulting changes.


Surely that happened, right? Right?

apparently people have not been actually paying attention. the scheduling changes had nothing to do with the contract. the company was taking control of the pairings starting in October 2018 no matter what. the contract had nothing to do with that. others have pointed that out, but no one seems to notice.

we should be very thankful that we have the contract and its extremely strong language regarding pairing construction (it truly is industry leading) or else things would be way, way worse.

ask your friends at united and delta what would happen if the company optimized for lowest cost. would their cba pairing construction rules prevent anything at all? no, they would not.

i know reality doesn't fit the narrative of some of the complainers on here, but there are several of us that still like to point you back toward reality sometimes. I've seen other people do it in this thread, and be ignored, so now it is my turn to do it and be ignored.

Know your enemy.


The bottom line is those in position of drafting language should have known what JB would do and build sufficient language into the contract to limit JB's ability to phuck the pilots.


"Industry leading language".



Lol.