Staffing and the QSO
04-06-2005, 05:06 PM
#11
Guest
Posts: n/a
Optimization is also a mindset which we possess in abundance at jetBlue.
When I read the first issue of the White Papers, the first thing I said was they're gonna need to hire a lot more pilots if they expect to deliver on this.
The bottom line is that it's much much cheaper to keep as few bodies on the property as possible. You can promise the world but keep the staffing tight.
Open time and reserves are a bean counters number one target and we at jetBlue are no different than everybody else when it comes to cutting costs.
That's fine.
Just stop making promises.
-R
When I read the first issue of the White Papers, the first thing I said was they're gonna need to hire a lot more pilots if they expect to deliver on this.
The bottom line is that it's much much cheaper to keep as few bodies on the property as possible. You can promise the world but keep the staffing tight.
Open time and reserves are a bean counters number one target and we at jetBlue are no different than everybody else when it comes to cutting costs.
That's fine.
Just stop making promises.
-R
04-10-2005, 09:16 AM
#13
Guest
Posts: n/a
To the newly appointed staffing gurus:
Reserves and Open Time are very expensive so get ready for some serious disagreements with the people you have to convince. It's hard to make a business case for pilot QOL or more premium pay for a labor group that is viewed as highly compensated.
Don't just staff to run the airline.
Staff to keep your promises.
White Papers number 1 was used as a justification for weak base pay.
Good luck.
Reserves and Open Time are very expensive so get ready for some serious disagreements with the people you have to convince. It's hard to make a business case for pilot QOL or more premium pay for a labor group that is viewed as highly compensated.
Don't just staff to run the airline.
Staff to keep your promises.
White Papers number 1 was used as a justification for weak base pay.
Good luck.
04-26-2005, 05:13 AM
#15
Guest
Posts: n/a
Bluer,
White Papers are back on-line - plus 1.
I love the latest IBM commercials.
"my Lord, a giant sloth is attacking the kingdom!"
"what should we do?"
"we need a witch hunt!"
"yes a witch hunt!"
"and then a White Paper!"
"a White Paper? What do you do with a White Paper?"
"you READ IT!"
More on topic:
I would like to place a friendly wager that Dynamic Basing (the QSO was able to hammer out a definition at the last round table) will never happen. The hints were in the memo from the QSO. We will have automated jetway swaps which will place the burden of completing pairings on the pilots who bid them. Boston will be a big traditional base and LGB reserves will travel up and down the coast and drive all over the LA basin covering broken JFK trips.
Cool!
White Papers are back on-line - plus 1.
I love the latest IBM commercials.
"my Lord, a giant sloth is attacking the kingdom!"
"what should we do?"
"we need a witch hunt!"
"yes a witch hunt!"
"and then a White Paper!"
"a White Paper? What do you do with a White Paper?"
"you READ IT!"
More on topic:
I would like to place a friendly wager that Dynamic Basing (the QSO was able to hammer out a definition at the last round table) will never happen. The hints were in the memo from the QSO. We will have automated jetway swaps which will place the burden of completing pairings on the pilots who bid them. Boston will be a big traditional base and LGB reserves will travel up and down the coast and drive all over the LA basin covering broken JFK trips.
Cool!
04-26-2005, 05:48 AM
#16
Guest
Posts: n/a
I ran into a committee man the other day and heard the old
"we opened LGB and FLL for QOL. We really should be running everything from JFK."
Oh really?
OK. Let's do it. Bring everyone back to JFK and when we realize we can't cover spares and broken trips out West, we can all BID, for reserve TDY with hotels and per diem. And before we do that, let's make sure we have some scheduling guide language that prohibits the little out-of-seniority side deals that have become so popular at jetBlue.
Actually, why fly at all? Maybe I could get a full-time committee assignment and work out of my home office. That would be worth at least 90 hours and 20 days off, wouldn't it?
Love that premium pay!
"we opened LGB and FLL for QOL. We really should be running everything from JFK."
Oh really?
OK. Let's do it. Bring everyone back to JFK and when we realize we can't cover spares and broken trips out West, we can all BID, for reserve TDY with hotels and per diem. And before we do that, let's make sure we have some scheduling guide language that prohibits the little out-of-seniority side deals that have become so popular at jetBlue.
Actually, why fly at all? Maybe I could get a full-time committee assignment and work out of my home office. That would be worth at least 90 hours and 20 days off, wouldn't it?
Love that premium pay!
05-01-2005, 02:29 PM
#18
Guest
Posts: n/a
Dynamic Basing
Realistic,
Interestingly, if there is opposition to Dynamic Basing, it comes mostly from line pilots worried about "zipcode seniority," some of whom are on the QSO. The finance guys in Darien have said that Dynamic basing is cost efficient, saves on hotels and such, and would not cost anything since there would be no admin support at dynamic bases. Hopefully, automated jetway trades would be an addition to, not an alternative for, dynamic basing. The pilot group at JB is not a monolith. The pilots at the QSO all have different viewpoints based on where they sit, and the QSO was an opportunity for them to have some influence. Pilots who do not live near OAK or BOS do not care about DB. It will certainly be interesting to see who wins, but as someone said, follow the money!
Interestingly, if there is opposition to Dynamic Basing, it comes mostly from line pilots worried about "zipcode seniority," some of whom are on the QSO. The finance guys in Darien have said that Dynamic basing is cost efficient, saves on hotels and such, and would not cost anything since there would be no admin support at dynamic bases. Hopefully, automated jetway trades would be an addition to, not an alternative for, dynamic basing. The pilot group at JB is not a monolith. The pilots at the QSO all have different viewpoints based on where they sit, and the QSO was an opportunity for them to have some influence. Pilots who do not live near OAK or BOS do not care about DB. It will certainly be interesting to see who wins, but as someone said, follow the money!
05-01-2005, 09:33 PM
#20
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2005
Position: A320 FO
Posts: 157
Originally Posted by Meworry?
Realistic,
Interestingly, if there is opposition to Dynamic Basing, it comes mostly from line pilots worried about "zipcode seniority," some of whom are on the QSO. The finance guys in Darien have said that Dynamic basing is cost efficient, saves on hotels and such, and would not cost anything since there would be no admin support at dynamic bases. Hopefully, automated jetway trades would be an addition to, not an alternative for, dynamic basing. The pilot group at JB is not a monolith. The pilots at the QSO all have different viewpoints based on where they sit, and the QSO was an opportunity for them to have some influence. Pilots who do not live near OAK or BOS do not care about DB. It will certainly be interesting to see who wins, but as someone said, follow the money!
Interestingly, if there is opposition to Dynamic Basing, it comes mostly from line pilots worried about "zipcode seniority," some of whom are on the QSO. The finance guys in Darien have said that Dynamic basing is cost efficient, saves on hotels and such, and would not cost anything since there would be no admin support at dynamic bases. Hopefully, automated jetway trades would be an addition to, not an alternative for, dynamic basing. The pilot group at JB is not a monolith. The pilots at the QSO all have different viewpoints based on where they sit, and the QSO was an opportunity for them to have some influence. Pilots who do not live near OAK or BOS do not care about DB. It will certainly be interesting to see who wins, but as someone said, follow the money!
I have no problem with Dynamic Basing, especially if it saves $$ and makes the life better for some of our pilots, but there has to be several conditions. First, everytime we have opened up a new base, the productivity of JFK has taken a big hit (as in FLL and LGB). If it comes to pass (and I think it will, it saves $$$) then there should be no effort to make these bases productive, IE even with JFK, FLL, LGB in productivity. Pilots at these bases get the benefit of being based at home and should give up some productivity. This should also be the core of FLL and LGB as these bases were opened for pilot quality of life and to save $$$ not to give them parity in productivity. But of course that isn't what happned. Thus the main benefit should be quality of life, not productivity.
Second, If JFK productivity goes down the toilet, then DB should end. No questions asked, just end it.
I think that most pilots will support DB if it doesn't affect their productivity. If the majority take a major hit then the support for DB will go away. Then, maybe as others have posted. we need to move all pilots back to JFK and get rid of all pilot bases until we can make larger ones vs the small pilot bases we currently have. (wouldn't that **** off the FLL senior pilots and KK)
I do hope that the automated gateway trades are available for all bases. It has the potential to "almost" create a dynamic base at any JB city with a large or small pilot group.
I do have one big fear. That the management will only implement changes that help the company, and ignore changes that help the pilots but may cost some $$$ or force crew services to work harder (read as "do their job"). Anything they they don't like they just "study" it till it dies or is just ignored. I hope not, but I am afraid it might happen.
Just my opinion....
FNG
