That's adorable. Haven't said a word about it in months, but you do you.

I *hope* that any attempt at getting rid of DTZ is an absolute no vote from everyone at NK.

I also *hope* that enough B6'ers can see the value of it too...

Here's to hoping in I've hand and crapping in the other to see which one fills up first

1:2 TAFB rig. I like it!

Ha, right, but do the math on 1 to 3 TAFB... It's pretty great.

As a JetBlue guy, I would love to keep DTZ!

correct me if I’m wrong, my line of thinking may be off but won’t a lower rig potentially increase legs per day? If more trips are rigged they would start to add more flying per day to increase pilot utilization.

definitely for a better rig to increase trip payouts. Just not sure how that would change scheduling.

They will already be doing that, to try and defeat the 5 hour average daily guarantee. Those 10-11 hour three days will start to pay 15, and the 17-18 hour four days will pay 20. Because of that, they will add flying to the beginning, or end, or both. Or just restructure the trip. And they will do that making trips start earlier and end later, and they will still just pay ~5 hours per day.

If you also tighten up the TAFB rig, then making trips start early and end late will add even MORE credit to the trip. Will it also add more flying? Probably not a big difference, as management under just the ADG scenario will already be adding more flying, when they can. So I think a 1 to 3 TAFB rig will add more pay than flying, and the company will have to balance out payroll vs making trips more gentlemanly.

I think it could be a significant pay/QOL driver. They will build some trips that pay more, and some trips that start later and end earlier to try and save money on the new TAFB rig.


My initial thought on the subject.

personally would rather see a min day vs min duty. Don’t know how that would skew or change scheduling. At the very least I’d like to see redeyes actually pay 2 days, I personally avoid them at all cost but if they paid 2 days instead staff them would be less of an issue and it would be much more enticing.

also hate front/back loading trips, 3 or 4 legs on either the first or last day with only 1 leg on every other day. Would be nice if it were more evenly spread.

if scheduling is gonna try to increase the flying regardless I agree better rig to increase the payout of some inefficient trips would be nice

I think a tighter TAFB rig is the best way to keep them from front and back loading trips. If they want to add flying to day 1 or the last day, the TAFB gets longer and so does the pay, above and beyond the 5 hour Average Daily Guarantee.

Just adding a min day, would raise pay, but would probably exacerbate the problem of adding flying to the first and last day, as why pay you the "min day" to fly one leg?

Add a provision for 200% pay for all flying after 2000 on the last trip day? Or for any flying before 1000 on the first day? That would at a minimum improve commutability.