Home Basing - What If?
 

I know a few charter and smaller 135 outfits offer home basing already. I personally commute 2 and sometimes 3 legs from the Midwest to a PDT base, and am perfectly happy in doing so. The questions I have are, as the amount of available pilots (due to pay or otherwise) becomes more scarce...

What if a regional airline were to offer a home-basing option?

Would it attract anyone additionally or cause lateral movement to said airline?

Would it offset pay scale comparisons to know you could be based virtually anywhere and always have a way to/from your trips or reserve periods?

Discuss...

You will get a lot of naysayers from the "Thats the way it is" group.

I propose that airlines be required to place a pilot in the domicile that is easiest for them to get to. IE Pilot lives in Virgnia, they would be forced to place them in a DC base as opposed to a Dallas base. Yes that might cause displacements but it would (after a shift in mindset) drastically increase QOL and reduce commuters.

If I were just getting into the game, I'd seriously consider any airline with a home basing option. And if a (non-cargo) major ever offered it, they'd probably become my #1 choice. That said, it wouldn't be worth a lateral move.

It's a great idea on paper and probably works for small 135 companies when they have Just maybe handfuls of pilots, but say a company for example Skywest to offer this who has a few thousand pilots, with probably a pretty large share that commute to offer each and everyone of them a chance to be home based maybe far stretched. It's an interesting concept but the issue, what if say Skywest doesn't fly to that persons home town, would they have to start service there? What if only one person commutes from said location, or how would trips start? That's a lot of movement of reserves from hubs to out stations and deadheads for them back just so joe doe can be based at home in Fargo.

To clarify, what if you were scheduled a ride to/from domicile from your home airport or closest that the parent airline or one of their partners serves. For example, at PDT, when you go for training events, they will bring you to/from CLT, DFW, etc from your home airport, instead of your domicile.

I feel that this should be priority number 2 right behind pay in contract negotiations. Times have changed and more and more of the general public are traveling and getting a seat can be an act of god at times. Then, you always can't rely on the jumpseat due to weight and balance or ego trips. Commuting sucks no matter how you look at it, but if I had a guaranteed seat to and from work, that would definetely ease the sting. I would even agree to living within an hours drive of an airport that my airline or their affiliates serve if I knew I was always going to get on. That would most certainly be worth a move.

so a guaranteed seat to commute? count me in

There's way too many commuters for this to be feasible

Exactly. I'm running some numbers on what the commuter hotels are costing a company vs. guaranteed commutes. If say 450 pilots utilized 4 provided hotel rooms per month at an average of $50 cost per night you are looking at $1.1 million per year. Then factor in the lost productivity and schedule impacts of having a commuter clause for a possible 2700 days of work lost at 6 events allowed per year. It seems that if (dare I say) some efficiency could be worked out with a guaranteed ride program, it shouldn't cost much more. It could actually be a benefit to the company and could have the added effect of attracting pilots to that company. Thoughts?

I agree. My commute over time has become more and more difficult, but I'm not about to move to base for this job. No way. First, no cost of living adjustment and my retirement would suffer badly for the move due to sharply increased housing costs at my base. Saving for retirement is my #1 priority. Second I like where I live, and have friends and family here, don't like the city of my base, and lastly my wife has a fantastic job here. The single most stressful aspect of this career, to me, is the commute. I feel like I am rolling the dice with my job each and every week. A positive space seat would be like a dream come true.

The airline need commuters as much as we need the ability to commute. Look at the difficulty they have keeping seats filled now. Can you imagine if they did away with commuting? No one would take this job if you HAD to live in LA, or NYC, or SFO. They'd have to triple pay rates at least. Yet, commuting is increasingly difficult as seats are full all the time now, and if you don't make the commute to work despite your best efforts, prepare to face the wrath even if you have a 'commuter clause'.

If I was already planning to make a lateral move, an airline with home basing might be towards the top of the list of places to go. Home-basing itself wouldn't be enough for me to want to give up seniority, pay, etc, right now. I think it would still be better to be based in a city I want to live in than have ride in the back to and from work. And if the work rules and/or pay sucked, I'd rather be a commuter at a place with a decent contract. I'm sure I'd feel differently if I was commuting from a small town with only a couple flights per day or a double or even triple leg commute. That would get old fast.

Home basing works better in the charter, 135 and 91K world because there aren't regular routes, and those planes fly all over the country/world. Unlike 121 airlines, it's not like the planes are flying through ORD several times a week (or even several times a day), as to where you could schedule crews to meet the plane. Even without home-basing, places like NetJets, Flexjet, etc, would still be deadheading crews all over the country to get them to the aircraft. It doesn't really cost the company extra to deadhead crews from their own home than to figure out how to get them from VNY, TEB, etc, to wherever the plane is each week.

It would (in theory) be great.

The trick would be this: Get them to include your re-position flight as a work segment that cannot occur on one of your minimum days off, and to be included as a flight segment and FDP time as per 117.

This ^^^

I think it would be huge for QOL. It would totally take away a lot of the pressure with this job. It would mean more time at home, more rest, and less stress overall. However I don't think it will ever happen. Management looks at it like we have the "privilege" to be able to live where we want and commute. They don't see it as their responsibility to get us into base (nor are they obligated to). I think home basing would be a big recruiting bump for the first regional to offer it.

I don't know. If you would have told me two years ago the company would provide commuter hotels, I would have called you crazy. Now company provided commuter hotels are becoming industry standard. I don't see full on home basing at 121 carriers. However commuters being provided a monthly allowance of positive space seats to get to work? I don't think that would be too far fetched considering at PDT, when I can't get to base (At this point at least once a month) they must ride me anyway.

I don't think the airlines would want to do that nor do I think the non commuters. I think if that were the case we would all move to Hawaii and bid 3 day trips DH to NY, 117 rest day, DH back to Hawaii on the third day.

I would jump from 135 to 121 in a heartbeat if this was the case.

[QUOTE=chrisreedrules;2084705]This ^^^

Management looks at it like we have the "privilege" to be able to live where we want and commute. They don't see it as their responsibility to get us into base (nor are they obligated to). QUOTE]

Sadly, this is a true statement but an old way of thinking for management. Back when the airlines were first starting I could see being able to live anywhere a "Privilege." Especially when flights were going out half full and there were no small RJs. Now, commuting is almost a necessity because living in the bigger cities is darn near impossible if you even want to think about retiring. I almost wish the Big 3 or any airline for that matter, would offer incentives for living in base such as mortgage, down payment assistance, or 100% moving reimbursement to offset the ridiculous COL. Management needs to start realizing this but I doubt they ever will unless they have cold hard numbers showing that they will benefit from this.

Who says it has to involve the 117 rest rules? They have never dealt with the subject of commuting, for a reason. No one is checking on the company-provided commuter hotels whether I have had required rest or not before a trip. Frequently I am on the last flight into domicile at close to 0000 in for a 0430-0600 show time. Sometimes I ride a cargo flight all night with hardly any rest and go right to work. Again, very happy to do what I do, but the idea of company involvement has its merits.

I'd be willing to waive any 117 implications for a pre-organized ride to work, you better believe it. It is no less safe then what a lot of people are already doing. The program would have its limitations, such as lower 48 resident only, no international, etc..

Yeah, no. For a variety of reasons.

1) I don't want to be forced to commute on a red-eye and then do a full day of flying.

2) The company wouldn't accept the liability of the above situation. Imagine the hell that would rain down upon them the moment a pilot bent an airplane, and it was discovered that the company-arranged commute was unreasonable from a rest/fatigue standpoint, and exempt from the laws in place to prevent that very thing.

3) Therefore, the only way to make home-basing work is to arrange the commute like any other leg with regards to duty time and rest.

4) With the current trend of airline schedules, this wouldn't work. 4 day trips with a 4-7 hour DH on either end? So every 2 day trip would become a 4-day? The company would need 50% more pilots to make it work. The only way to do this would be like we've seen others do it. 14-17 day trips, with a block of time off after that. With the way regionals pay per-diem and hotels, they wouldn't want to do that either.


Lastly, openly admitting that you routinely arrange your commute such that you get between 0 and 4 hours of sleep before a full duty day is pretty dang stupid.

I think some variation of this idea could work. For instance if you're based in XYZ you try to jumpseat on a flight and get denied. As long as there's another flight on your own airline, they positive space you even if it results in a denied boarding for a paying pax.

A lot of guys work who work 135 now would probably consider 121 employment if the commuting stress was removed.

Not trying to be too much of a Debbie Downer, I think that would be a cool option only for mainline pilots, not regional pilots. Why add such a cushy perk to what should be a temporary job? The more that can be done to finish off the regionals, the better. Yes, I'm a commuter and regularly enjoy the pure hell that it is.

Or, the airlines could create a system that would allow us to actually reserve the jumpseat, similar to FedEx. First come, first serve. When you get your line awarded for the next month, you just have to go and reserve the jumpseat for your flights to and from home for the whole next month.

There could be a stipulation or two to prevent abuse. For example, be required to register a home airport, and only have the ability to reserve the jumpseat between your home airport and wherever you're based.

Something like that. Just throwing ideas around.

This is why we have 117 rest. To stop fatigued pilots flying like the colgan
crash. When both pilots sign the release they are saying they are rested and fit for flight. They cannot and will not DH you on a flight that violates FARs. Pilots have been fighting for better rest for years, trying to get away from reduced rest.

The solution is to pay people enough to live in base and provide an unlimited commuter policy. That would mean 6 figure pay for first year pilots in NYC, LAX, and SFO bases so pilots can actually move their families to those bases. For those that still can't move, the high pay rate should mean that even if you miss a bunch of trips due to the commuter policy, you will still make a living wage.

Lastly, openly admitting that you routinely arrange your commute such that you get between 0 and 4 hours of sleep before a full duty day is pretty dang stupid.[/QUOTE]

I respect your other points, but I wouldn't call it stupid. It's the reality of it and I stand by it. It gives me the most time at home and allows me to truly enjoy what I do. There are several folks out there that always ride all night long for those morning shows.

If companies want to continue staffing regional flying, they will have to think outside the box. If they are going to drag their heels on pay, schedules/days off, etc...this is one area they need to attempt a look at. What regionals have offered over the past few years is unprecedented, now they need to offer more than ever.

Umm, what? You frequently and willingly get less then 4 hours of sleep? And are happy to do it? :eek: Great attitude you've got there...It worries me that with that judgment you are a Captain of a transport category aircraft.

I love what I do plain and simple. So I get a little less sleep once a week or so...not like I don't have that 18 hour overnight coming at me in TRI or ELM to rest up. If I told you how often I slept in my prior career you would really worry then. It is all relative...

I don't think there is any way around part 117 if the company moves you from home, even just to "commute". It's a dirty secret in our industry that was briefly pierced on the Colgan crash. Pilots commute across the country then start a full duty day.

If the company did move you, you would lose days off. How do you get around that? Although any deadhead after your shift is counted as duty and not flight duty, the same cannot be said with the beginning of your duty period.

It seems far easier and cheaper to purchase commuter hotels. Alternately, you could see more outstation basing such as at airlines like Allegiant.

Great, fatigue, possibly related to commuting, is part of an NTSB major accident report. And we have here another regional pilot admitting he does exactly what the accident crew did--show up fatigued after an all night flight into the domicile. We await the headlines.

Take some responsibility for showing up rested and fit for duty, Lving4spd. Hopefully, your next admission isn't related to your avatar.

GF

I do accept full responsibility for my actions, and thank you for your concern? My obligation lies with my pasengers and crew alone, and I don't report to fly if I don't feel fit to do so. When and if I am fatigued I will declare myself as such. Thankfully, that is solely my own personal call to make. Are we clear?

You're perfectly clear, in both your opinion and your lack of understanding of the science of fatigue. Four hours of sleep is simply not adequate for a full duty day and the science says the individual is the least capable of correctly judging their actual fatigue state. Commuting in a "red eye" is poor judgement and you are really rationalizing your irresponsibility.

GF

Sorry, not buying that. What you are describing is not only irresponsible but extremely selfish. I'm already hesitant about putting myself and my family on airlines that notoriously operate with inexperienced crews, mainly due to poor judgement. In all honesty, please think about the passengers and crew who are trusting you to report for duty well-rested. You're a Captain...act like one.

That is exactly why I fly 135 vs. 121. I spoke with many 121 pilots who told me the commuting game has now become a trip to the casino every time they would try to get to work. Sometimes it's a winner, sometimes it's a loser. I'd love to fly 121 but I will not move to DTW or EWR or MSP to do it just to be "in base" and make wages that would only be sustainable in the rural southern states. Now, I let the company figure out how I will get to work and all that commute time is on-duty time. Positive space travel: no jumpseating, no guessing, no headaches. I have seen pilots sweat it out waiting at the gate wondering if they'll get to work. That, to me, is not right.

It's insane is what it is.

You sir are a moron and I cannot believe someone made you a captain.

DH

NEVER happen. But, I do believe that airlines should be required to pay COLA based on where pilots are based...but again. NEVER happening.

A COLA will never happen because you'd have to negotiate it and then you'd need support from the majority of the Union which is probably not based in the high cost city


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

If you're moving on the company dime, you're on duty. That is jut the way it is and that would make the idea of home basing at an airline very difficult. Honestly, with a commuter clause, I never stressed too much about getting to work. Tried twice, called the company. No harm, no foul.

The biggest stress for me was the never knowing when I'd get home. I think the best thing the airlines could do is offer positive space home on the first flight after your return to base. It's just tacking a DH on to your schedule and since it would have to be negotiated in to the contract, the Union could agree that that one flight goes unpaid.

Another stipulation that would help the company would be that they are only required to do a single leg and that it must be serviced by the parent company of regional you work for.