Nope. Can't happen. It happened at NWA and as we all know, all things NWA are bad!!!

I suspect the company would not like a required monthly AE. There is nothing preventing them from doing that now. The airline that NWA was verses the airline we have today are vastly different. NWA was a relatively static route and basing system. The system we run today is in constant flux with far more route and fleet changes.

Seems to me to be the exact reason a monthly AE would be beneficial.

FWIW, I️ spoke to an LCA today who went to some big meeting last week. He said he was told a small AE will be published this coming Tuesday 14th.

Don’t shoot the messenger if it doesn’t happen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ok guys, I definately understand the hesitation because of potential abusers. And for a second there I was agreeing with this monthly AE idea. But then I thought about it a bit and realized if your fear is senior pilots swooping in to cherry pick trips for a few months, a monthly AE is terrible!!! It allows exactly that!!!

Think about it. Senior pilots could bid ANY base EVERY month in their fleet. So what's stopping them from doing EXACTLY what you fear worst???

The benefit of swaps is there is just as much posibility of you moving UP in category as down, since someone has to LEAVE YOUR BASE when the new pilot comes in.

1. AE's are a MANUAL (labor intensive process) = COSTS $$$
Swaps are automated = free
(Moot point if they could automate AE's but that's not the case at the moment)

2. AE's require vacancies
Swaps are PILOT NEUTRAL

3. Swaps are NOT TDY!!! HELL NO TO TDY!!! (Again, swaps are pilot neutral! The company doesn't even notice it happening.)

4. Swaps in my propsed system would have you LOSE AWARDED VACATIONS and pick from what's available. That's a big incentive NOT to swap.

5. This is not the same as the pilot swap board. You don't get to pick who you swap with. So the chances for abuse are much lower.

6. 1 swap allowance per year would further alleviate concerns.

7. Remember, you can only swap if someone wants your base. If 35 people put in a swap to leave NYC for ATL, and 0 people want to leave ATL for NYC, then nothing happens that month. If next month 1 person decides they want NYC, then the other 34 junior pilots are still stuck.

8. You could have it be restricted to base to base only. (i.e. no 3 way swaps) or you could try making it better to allow 3+ way swaps. One is very simple and one is very complicated but probably doable with $.

Sorry that went long

Wait, what? No bro, I fly with almost all fNWA guys, and they all assure me that everything NWA did was gold.

Probably true. But with a small AE with hiring ongoing and tons of nyc new hires could allow them to open say ATL717B 10 and that's the whole bid for that month.

I think quarterly AEs would be a great Compromise. Less work from planning or scheduling and still gives guys chances to get to the bases they want. Whatever the planning numbers are for how many Pilots per position a quarterly ae comes out even if it's just one number off to offer a guy or gal a chance to move.

AEs in their current form allow for equipment moves, which require training and complicate the process. Swaps carry the negative connotations of moving bases out of seniority order. I think the main objectives is for pilots to move out of a base when there is another pilot wishing to move into their base. I think we need a new acronym for these Base Only Outflows By Seniority. By using new language, we will avoid pre-conceived notions of terms like AE, swaps, tdy, etc. All those in favor of the new acronym...

I'm not against them but don't think they'd be as awesome as many are assuming they would be. We'd still be dealing with the same marketing dominated flt ops situation and even if you had monthly AE's it wouldn't change as much as people think because they don't really have to offer anything if they don't need to.

The notion that anyone would be able to simply base hop monthly is a bit optimistic. If it did away with the asinine one year conversion window bid I'd be all for it though.