|
Originally Posted by Balker
(Post 2960971)
It’s funny he/she used the term “steal”. Regular pilots don’t have a say, period.
Now one has to wonder how much pairing building influence has the union scheduling committee. It is impossible to think that the pairing optimizer it’s building layovers in FLL to do day turns. Bringing a crew from another base and having to pay 2 hotel nights per pilot to do a CTG day turn makes zero sense from the cost perspective. It should be a day trip for a FLL crew. As a matter of fact, all Central/South America/Caribbean turns should be day turns and not built into trips. They pay block (except very few exceptions) so there’s absolutely no cost advantage into inserting them into multi-day trips to balance the trip rig out. You’re looking at it on a hotel cost and hard block turn basis not a global solution across the system. I can bet my next paycheck they wouldn’t be paying the hotels and would have in base crews doing those in base turns if it were cheaper on a network scale. It’s not now but it might be as new and different flights and city pairs or frequency are added. That’s why when we had hard lines some months we’d have 20 day trip lines and the next month it would be only 4 with all the choice flying farmed out to other bases, and then the following month 20 again. It’s all because as the entire network schedule changes the optimizer makes the lowest cost pairing build with overall cost in mind. That might mean spending what may seem like unnecessary $20,000 on hotels for flights that could be in base turns but saving $21k in scheduling efficiencies elsewhere. To the company they saved $1,000 but you see $20,000 in hotels. |
For Chicago I finished OE in September and should hold a line in March.
|
Originally Posted by Qotsaautopilot
(Post 2961077)
problem is that you’re looking at it on a single turn or multiple turn situation. It might cost a couple hotels but they may be saving anywhere else in the system making a crew from another base more productive (less soft time or requiring less overall pilots) by having an out of base crew come and do turns in a different base as part of a 4 day.
You’re looking at it on a hotel cost and hard block turn basis not a global solution across the system. I can bet my next paycheck they wouldn’t be paying the hotels and would have in base crews doing those in base turns if it were cheaper on a network scale. It’s not now but it might be as new and different flights and city pairs or frequency are added. That’s why when we had hard lines some months we’d have 20 day trip lines and the next month it would be only 4 with all the choice flying farmed out to other bases, and then the following month 20 again. It’s all because as the entire network schedule changes the optimizer makes the lowest cost pairing build with overall cost in mind. That might mean spending what may seem like unnecessary $20,000 on hotels for flights that could be in base turns but saving $21k in scheduling efficiencies elsewhere. To the company they saved $1,000 but you see $20,000 in hotels. Who cares? You guys are trying to figure out what hotels cost the company on these trips while Delta is figuring what 16.6% is of their W2... I dont care what hotels cost or if they are losing money with their staffing vs savings. We are not partners in profit sharing. So again I ask, who cares? |
Originally Posted by Qotsaautopilot
(Post 2961077)
problem is that you’re looking at it on a single turn or multiple turn situation. It might cost a couple hotels but they may be saving anywhere else in the system making a crew from another base more productive (less soft time or requiring less overall pilots) by having an out of base crew come and do turns in a different base as part of a 4 day.
You’re looking at it on a hotel cost and hard block turn basis not a global solution across the system. I can bet my next paycheck they wouldn’t be paying the hotels and would have in base crews doing those in base turns if it were cheaper on a network scale. It’s not now but it might be as new and different flights and city pairs or frequency are added. That’s why when we had hard lines some months we’d have 20 day trip lines and the next month it would be only 4 with all the choice flying farmed out to other bases, and then the following month 20 again. It’s all because as the entire network schedule changes the optimizer makes the lowest cost pairing build with overall cost in mind. That might mean spending what may seem like unnecessary $20,000 on hotels for flights that could be in base turns but saving $21k in scheduling efficiencies elsewhere. To the company they saved $1,000 but you see $20,000 in hotels. |
what is the typical schedule for a DFW based pilot, say a three-year FO ?
Thank you |
Originally Posted by Balker
(Post 2960971)
It’s funny he/she used the term “steal”. Regular pilots don’t have a say, period.
Now one has to wonder how much pairing building influence has the union scheduling committee. It is impossible to think that the pairing optimizer it’s building layovers in FLL to do day turns. Bringing a crew from another base and having to pay 2 hotel nights per pilot to do a CTG day turn makes zero sense from the cost perspective. It should be a day trip for a FLL crew. As a matter of fact, all Central/South America/Caribbean turns should be day turns and not built into trips. They pay block (except very few exceptions) so there’s absolutely no cost advantage into inserting them into multi-day trips to balance the trip rig out. I don't know about that. Day 1&4 low block (1-2 legs to/from MCO or FLL) with 2 int'l turns on day 2&3 gets you closer to the 5 hr min day rather than paying each 6+hr turn individually. Not that I wouldn't rather you guys fly them... |
Originally Posted by senecacaptain
(Post 2961180)
what is the typical schedule for a DFW based pilot, say a three-year FO ?
Thank you |
Originally Posted by Omniscient
(Post 2961160)
Who cares? You guys are trying to figure out what hotels cost the company on these trips while Delta is figuring what 16.6% is of their W2...
I dont care what hotels cost or if they are losing money with their staffing vs savings. We are not partners in profit sharing. So again I ask, who cares? Exactly, so what if the company burns extra money? It’s just less money for a bonus for one of our higher ups. So who cares if it costs the company extra? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
Originally Posted by flyingpuma1
(Post 2961276)
Exactly, so what if the company burns extra money? It’s just less money for a bonus for one of our higher ups. So who cares if it costs the company extra?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
Originally Posted by Omniscient
(Post 2961160)
Who cares? You guys are trying to figure out what hotels cost the company on these trips while Delta is figuring what 16.6% is of their W2...
I dont care what hotels cost or if they are losing money with their staffing vs savings. We are not partners in profit sharing. So again I ask, who cares? |
Originally Posted by Balker
(Post 2961166)
Of course I get that part, but there’s no way in hell the trip optimizer couldn’t find other legs for those crews. ALPA’s scheduling committee has more say that you might think (strangely, they don’t devote their energies to stop those 2-leg red eyes going thru LAS, a crew base).
25.A.4 The Company and the Association Scheduling Committee will review the monthly bid package prior to its publication and will confer on other occasions to discuss scheduling problems and improvements. Doesnt sound like much influence to me. 25.A.1.a The Company and the Association Scheduling Committee shall jointly construct all lines and pairings so as to assure safety of flight (i.e., no redeye-plus-one pairings, and no more than one check-in per calendar day). Redeye-plus-one pairings have any duty period portion within the hours of 0200 and 0459 local domicile time and after the first flight leg a subsequent flight leg scheduled to depart after 0300 local domicile time. sounds to me like it’s only about safety issues. No fatigue reports and it’s all good. Remember we can always fill out an informational fatigue report about bad pairings. |
Originally Posted by SSlow
(Post 2961297)
Who cares you ask? Probably those who have the seniority to hold what should be a turn in domicile, so they can go home and sleep in their own bed at night. I think they would probably care.
If you wanted to be home every night (mostly) then you should have gone to Allegiant. There’s never any guarantees that the schedules out of each bases will keep a certain number of turns. I certainly have seen them disappear out of my base and yet I don’t care if it cost the company more money in overnighting people, honestly I hope it does as I don’t see a profit sharing check. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
Originally Posted by Qotsaautopilot
(Post 2961327)
it’s not going to find them without increasing cost. That thing solves for lowest global cost, period.
25.A.4 The Company and the Association Scheduling Committee will review the monthly bid package prior to its publication and will confer on other occasions to discuss scheduling problems and improvements. Doesnt sound like much influence to me. 25.A.1.a The Company and the Association Scheduling Committee shall jointly construct all lines and pairings so as to assure safety of flight (i.e., no redeye-plus-one pairings, and no more than one check-in per calendar day). Redeye-plus-one pairings have any duty period portion within the hours of 0200 and 0459 local domicile time and after the first flight leg a subsequent flight leg scheduled to depart after 0300 local domicile time. sounds to me like it’s only about safety issues. No fatigue reports and it’s all good. Remember we can always fill out an informational fatigue report about bad pairings. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:47 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands