Not if they were built only into hard lines. Anything subsequently dropped would go into open time for bidding and then reserves, but there should be significant protections for reserves. Like when you are done with one, you are done until at least noon the following day.

The lines would be extremely high credit to block and would go very, very senior.

And they would be much safer than the current optimizer hodge podge circadian flipping rotations currently built. Early report (you totally got 8 hours of full on REM sleep by going to bed at 6-7PM, right? LOL sure you did) 3-4 leg day with 2 plane changes, maybe a 30 hour layover where you get in late and have to leave early yet have to sleep twice (right) and another long day finish late, do a redeye and then a day sleep and another long 4-5 leg day with 2 plane changes to finish late etc. Yeah that's much safer than circadian consistency. #science

If a reserve gets one... pay no credit.

What does that mean exactly?

Its funny seeing the strong opinions against the unknown that by definition would only be an option with significant restrictions. That said, what it would take for me to vote yes for them would probably be well beyond the company's cost threshold anyway. Right now marketing and the optimizer are in complete command.

While I could agree to these under certain conditions, those conditions would likely roll back some amount of the optimizer's fantasy credit/excessive pilot positions white paper B-School bonus factory and so will likely never happen anyway.

Its just interesting watching the sheer unity against something that isn't even defined based purely on subjective concept, while not having them clearly results in far more circadian disrupting pairings in many cases.

It means exactly what it says. If you are a reserve pilot, and you get one of these God awful things, you get pay and no credit. Inother words, premium pay. I think reserves should also get pay no credit for any trip they get called out on that flies over a holiday.

Essentially I agree with you. I am just putting it down in writing. I would never fly one anyway, even if I got called out on one because I already know I would be fatigued. It's the same reason I don't do transcon all nighters.

Stand ups... imho... are unsafe.

And so are redeyes you just said. How about 4-5 day domestic trips that constantly circadian flip? How about simple early reports where 2-3+ hour drive "non commuters" have to be in bed and fully and completely asleep uninterrupted for 8 hours? What percentage of the time does that actually happen? Then the trip flips then flips again?

Hard lines of time with CD's would be dramatically safer than much of the off cycle and cycle flipping flying that's done now and would go very senior all the time. The few that ended up in open time would burn reserves at a very unproductive rate (regardless of how they paid) with proper safeguards like nothing til 10am/noon the next day etc.

Yet we unify against the broad concept based on theoretical hyperbole while tolerating worse trips WRT rest/circadian considerations. And 20 something+ scope violations...

Not theory, but years of experience involuntarily flying these sleep depriving abominations.

This (completely unscientific) poll went thankfully about as I expected. 15% for, 85% against.

Reading comments, what really defines this concept, are the againsts are AGAINST. It is very strong feedback. Most don’t want these type trips, and certainly don’t want them for less than what the contract pays now.

I don’t think we will see this ever implemented. Just like when the union explored this after C2012, the opinion of the group is basically unchanged.

Thank you to all for your feedback!

Whoaaaaaa.. easy there big fella. I wasn't trying to solve all the problems. Just adding opinion regarding stand ups. If the groups wants them and we get them, fine. I can gu-ar-an-tee you that I will never fly one. Even on reserve. But if I do start one, I will probably not finish it.

I don't remember all of the details of the last effort, but I do remember I was not in favor of some of the language. The upper limit of block time plus the minimum limits of time in hotel combined were both no gos.

And I'm not hard core in favor of them either. I'm just saying that IF the rules governing them were written well enough, they would be incredibly senior and safer than some flying we currently do from a circadian perspective.

It was already explained why the poll is worthless. You don't know how many in the poll are only against doing them at a discount. The only real feedback is the actual posting which isn't nearly as "defining." This poll was set up to almost force that kind of result regardless of the group's overall opinion on that kind of flying.