Commuting on SWA
02-02-2020, 08:18 AM
#11
Line Holder
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: In Class
Posts: 45
Originally Posted by Bwipilot
We?
"I" wish "Creating Commutable Lines" was a win win issue--but it's not. Making them will greatly affect the other lines -- or we'd already have them. From my peanut gallery, creating commutable lines lowers the productivity of the average pairing. Comparing our trips to OALs, I'd note that commuters have to spend a night in base before/after a trip--but also get the same amount of work done in a 3 day as OALs do in a 4 day trip. The big difference is that SWA commuters have pick up the tab for the stay the night before/after while OALs spend it on the road.
Hence, you won't get any support from me to build more commutable lines--and I'll even strongly oppose it. My personal vote determined by the win/lose issue: Every line built for a commuter reduces the number of quality lines for those who live in base. There are enough commuters who enjoy working less days (productive trips) that they don't favor creating more lines that are commutable but less productive either.
"I" wish "Creating Commutable Lines" was a win win issue--but it's not. Making them will greatly affect the other lines -- or we'd already have them. From my peanut gallery, creating commutable lines lowers the productivity of the average pairing. Comparing our trips to OALs, I'd note that commuters have to spend a night in base before/after a trip--but also get the same amount of work done in a 3 day as OALs do in a 4 day trip. The big difference is that SWA commuters have pick up the tab for the stay the night before/after while OALs spend it on the road.
Hence, you won't get any support from me to build more commutable lines--and I'll even strongly oppose it. My personal vote determined by the win/lose issue: Every line built for a commuter reduces the number of quality lines for those who live in base. There are enough commuters who enjoy working less days (productive trips) that they don't favor creating more lines that are commutable but less productive either.
02-02-2020, 09:50 AM
#12
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2013
Posts: 3,424
Commuting on SWA
I am ok with the lines like they are and I commute. I probably average 1 overnight stay in base every month because I seek out commutable trips and they are pretty easy to find right now due to the normal ebb of flying this time of year.
I have 127 tfp on my board for Feb (that number will more than likely decrease as I plan on dropping a trip later) right now and only one non commutable trip.
I like the AM/PM schedule. It works well for me as a human.
I have 127 tfp on my board for Feb (that number will more than likely decrease as I plan on dropping a trip later) right now and only one non commutable trip.
I like the AM/PM schedule. It works well for me as a human.
02-02-2020, 10:51 AM
#13
Furloughed Again?!
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Position: Boeing 737
Posts: 4,795
Doesn’t matter to me either personally since I live in domicile. But there’s 10,000 of us so I think there’s an opportunity to construct a variety of types of lines that work for different demographics.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
02-02-2020, 03:14 PM
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2015
Posts: 629
Originally Posted by ZapBrannigan
Are you aware of the fatuity assuming that the vast majority view is incorrect? I voted NO for TA 1 because the retirement contribution was insulting. I voted YES for TA2 because, at the time an improvement to retirement was my line in the sand. I’m tired of being told I was wrong by a tiny minority.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-Tiny Majority
02-02-2020, 03:51 PM
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,843
Originally Posted by MudhammedCJ
Guess you like being 6th place or so in pay. i don't. You were wrong.
-Tiny Majority
-Tiny Majority
So we’re #4. Not #6.
I’m fine waiting for DL/UAL/AA to sign and exceeding their rates this go around....
02-03-2020, 07:59 AM
#16
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2013
Position: Gear Puller
Posts: 103
Originally Posted by Bwipilot
We?
"I" wish "Creating Commutable Lines" was a win win issue--but it's not. Making them will greatly affect the other lines -- or we'd already have them. From my peanut gallery, creating commutable lines lowers the productivity of the average pairing. Comparing our trips to OALs, I'd note that commuters have to spend a night in base before/after a trip--but also get the same amount of work done in a 3 day as OALs do in a 4 day trip. The big difference is that SWA commuters have pick up the tab for the stay the night before/after while OALs spend it on the road.
Hence, you won't get any support from me to build more commutable lines--and I'll even strongly oppose it. My personal vote determined by the win/lose issue: Every line built for a commuter reduces the number of quality lines for those who live in base. There are enough commuters who enjoy working less days (productive trips) that they don't favor creating more lines that are commutable but less productive either.
"I" wish "Creating Commutable Lines" was a win win issue--but it's not. Making them will greatly affect the other lines -- or we'd already have them. From my peanut gallery, creating commutable lines lowers the productivity of the average pairing. Comparing our trips to OALs, I'd note that commuters have to spend a night in base before/after a trip--but also get the same amount of work done in a 3 day as OALs do in a 4 day trip. The big difference is that SWA commuters have pick up the tab for the stay the night before/after while OALs spend it on the road.
Hence, you won't get any support from me to build more commutable lines--and I'll even strongly oppose it. My personal vote determined by the win/lose issue: Every line built for a commuter reduces the number of quality lines for those who live in base. There are enough commuters who enjoy working less days (productive trips) that they don't favor creating more lines that are commutable but less productive either.
Allow me to respectfully rephrase:
‘SWAPA’ has mentioned that they want to address this issue. My source is in their FP2020.
I live in a SWA base; cannot hold it yet. So I’ve seen how commutable lines would be greatly beneficial to QOL for those who have no choice. I would submit that there are quite of few out there that are not aware of the sacrifice that comes with generating more commutable lines. I being one of them until now.
02-03-2020, 08:15 AM
#17
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Posts: 99
Originally Posted by ZapBrannigan
I disagree. I think that productive commutable trips can be constructed but they will be PM turn AM trips with short overnights.
The other option for commutable pairings are red eye trips - provided the redeye leg isn’t inserted into a regular trip. But pure redeye trips, although unpopular, are commutable on both ends.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The other option for commutable pairings are red eye trips - provided the redeye leg isn’t inserted into a regular trip. But pure redeye trips, although unpopular, are commutable on both ends.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
For every PM turned AM trip they create, most likely there will be a AM turned PM trip. Call me selfish but I don’t want spend more time on road just to please one group of pilots. One of the top things that brought me to SWA was the productivity of the trips. I average 18-19days off a month (perfectly happy with ~80TFP/month) and I don’t want to have to work an extra day or spend more time away from home than I already do.
02-03-2020, 08:21 AM
#18
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2009
Position: 737
Posts: 190
Commutable trips can be created -- but only by destroying other good trips.
To create the commutable PM turn AM, other trips are affected:
- a different trip becomes an AM turn PM (which ELITT and TTGA shows to be undesirable excepting a highly desirable AUA, PUJ, or SJO overnight).
- unproductive pairings or longer pairings (more 4 days) are created to change the flow of start and release times.
Ends up with borrowing from Peter to pay Paul.
To create the commutable PM turn AM, other trips are affected:
- a different trip becomes an AM turn PM (which ELITT and TTGA shows to be undesirable excepting a highly desirable AUA, PUJ, or SJO overnight).
- unproductive pairings or longer pairings (more 4 days) are created to change the flow of start and release times.
Ends up with borrowing from Peter to pay Paul.
02-03-2020, 08:22 AM
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2015
Posts: 629
Originally Posted by flyguy81
At the time of the AIP we were #1 in 737 pay except FO yr 1-4. Delta magically got their AIP not even a month after we got ours and their rates beat our AIP rates....funny how pattern bargaining works. UAL had a snap up provision so got immediate raises without having to wait. AA complained enough that mgt threw them a bone.
So we’re #4. Not #6.
I’m fine waiting for DL/UAL/AA to sign and exceeding their rates this go around....
So we’re #4. Not #6.
I’m fine waiting for DL/UAL/AA to sign and exceeding their rates this go around....
02-03-2020, 09:57 AM
#20
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,843
Originally Posted by MudhammedCJ
We hadn't voted on our TA2 yet when Delta (and thereby United) got their second TA with the higher rates. And apparently you aren't counting UPS and FedEx. Ridiculous.
Yes, we hadn’t voted. Neither had Delta. They were at a impasse until we secured a AIP. Funny how that works.
I trust the NC and they said there was nothing left to gain by voting it down and waiting. We got all the gains we could at the time. If we’re smart we’ll negotiate a me-too also so if mgt moves things quickly we don’t end up #4 again.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
