JetBlue has several rounds of vacation awards (bid 2 weeks each round) so the senior guys don’t grab all the best weeks. We also already have umpteen seniority-based “pick up” windows for the next months open time.

Combine the two - first round “pick up” window you can DT50. Second round DT25. Third round DTZ. And, like today, the first two are run in seniority order and the third one is first-come first-served.

That way in theory everyone gets a chance to drop toward zero.

this would be a great way to do it. Till I’m super senior then screw all y’all.

I’m just one vote but being at spirit I’m sure I’m not the only one who feels this way that I could do without drop to zero. In theory it sounds good to drop whatever you don’t want to fly and remake your own schedule. But in practicality I doubt it’s used to its full advantage by the entire pilot group every month. You can’t sit there and argue how advantageous it is and it’ll cost next to nothing bargaining capital when it’s the first thing management wants to get rid of at spirit and no other airline has it. It’s much more reasonable to not spend the capital on getting the ability to drop everything and have it at a set number of hours. Allowing you to drop 2 or 3 trips to be available for that week or two you might need off. Again I’m just one vote but I’m sure I’m not the only one willing to accept a drop to xx over drop to zero.

The issue is the cost of the initial green grid, NOT whether the potential drop is to 50 or 25 or 0. If three quarters of the grid must start green, that’s the major cost, not the coverage for the few pilots each cycle that would actually drop all the way to zero. MOST of the drops are in fact trades, and revenue neutral to the company. And even what little incremental cost there is is far from linear.

The drop to xx, even if it is 50, is by far the most costly part. The drop from 50 to 25 requires only a little more, and the drop from 25 to zero is damn near negligible, because the frequency of the drops decreases as zero is approached - it has to, since you can’t drop to 25 WITHOUT dropping to 50.

It’s non linear in cost (be it management dollars or negotiating capital).

Find an industrial engineer or someone with queuing theory training or experience to explain it to you.

It doesn’t have to be linear in practicality to be linear or exponential in cost. Just like a snap up doesn’t cost that much because in practicality it doesn’t cost anything day 1 and there no guarantee it’ll cost anything in a year but you can bet snap ups cost a lot of negotiating capital. Same with profit sharing. JetBlue won’t be profitable for years. Profit sharing won’t cost them anything but it’s a lot of negotiating capital. Why? Because of the potential future costs not the practical costs. If dropping to 50 or 40 satisfies 98% of the group, allowing you to drop 2-3 trips to free up time or pick up different trips you may want instead why should we spend any extra capital just so 2% more can rearrange their whole schedule as they please. If pilots think it’s so important to be able to rearrange their whole schedule you can see just how much negotiating capital it’s worth to the company. No one is giving any hand outs in this negotiation. You can’t expect to get something just because you assume it doesn’t cost the company anything monetarily.

Also like I said it’s just my opinion and my vote. If they offered drop to 30 or 40 or 50 but we get a whole hell of a lot in hard pay and better work rules I’d be in favor of that. I know there’s a lot of spirit pilots that’ll die on this hill of drop to zero. But I’m sure there’s a lot willing to compromise that allows them to drop half their schedule in exchange for everything else rather than drop to zero

EVERYONE has their price. Just like your group does with profit sharing….

This could very well be a 4-way cluster **** where nobody agrees on anything! And, I hope I have enough booze and popcorn to enjoy the show.

By that logic, the more pilots want anything the more the company ought to resist it. That’s nonsense. There are real costs and real marginal costs between proposals. And the cost is in the contractual obligation to keep most of the grid green initially before any drops whatsoever occur. , not with how many swaps occur before the grid days go from green to red.

But you are entitled to your opinion and your vote, just like me. Of course the NK pilots - at least the lineholders - have actual experience with DTZ, and know it’s costs and value. And the cost is in the contractual obligation to keep most of the grid green initially.

It seems like the JB guys are very unhappy with your grid and the NK guys are pretty happy with theirs. Maybe you ought to consider listening to those with a FAVORABLE experience with their grid rules and try THEIR solution rather than concede it out of hand before we really know if there will even be a JCBA.

DTZ and red/green are 2 totally separate things in the NK CBA. DTZ is hated by middle management because it looks like we get too much time off. But every trip dropped saves the company money, because we can only drop when the grid is green, so when there is a reserve they are paying anyway they will fly that trip. The real money is our red /green arbitration. The grid has to be green 75% of the days (and it can't be by just 1, there is more rules) before IOT starts so we need more pilots to cover that. More people below you, and a negotiating position JB does not have.

There’s no point in trying to convince me otherwise and I certainly don’t speak for the entire spirit group only myself when I say I’m willing to come to a compromise in getting rid of drop to zero in favor of drop to xx if it means we get other wishlist items. All I’m saying is I’m only one person at spirit but I doubt I’m alone in that I’m in favor of a compromise.