Originally Posted by fadec (Post 3487745)

If pay is differentiated by location it should be after-tax profit based not cost of living based. If your blue commie government taxes too much or your neighbors are Spirit flying trailer trash then maybe your fair share is smaller than the guy who renders his services in a posh libertarian paradise.

Originally Posted by worstpilotever (Post 3487760)

Off your meds this morning?

Originally Posted by jumppilot (Post 3487696)

Reserve will never go senior in domiciles that have co-terminal airports.

Originally Posted by elmetal (Post 3487108)

It's not even just that. No limits on SC conversions, the fact that FSB even exists is atrocious, list goes on.

Originally Posted by Larry in TN (Post 3488214)

The airline needs a way to recrew flights on short notice when they get a late sick call, a pilot times out, or a crew misconnects. How do we want them to do that?



One way is with field standby.



Without FSB, there will be a lot more line holder reassignments, one of the things that APA has been complaining about at AAL.



What other options are there that I haven't thought of? How do we want these re-crews to be handled?



I think a big deterrent to bidding a seat where you'll be on reserve is the 12/13 days off per month. That's not enough. I'm not willing to do that. Would it work to have 15/16 days off with reserve pilots able to pickup additional reserve days, for additional pay, down to 12 days, or even 10 days, off? I don't know. I'd look at reserve differently with a system like that.

Originally Posted by elmetal (Post 3488228)

They currently use "visiting reserves" way before they call FSBs. So even visiting reserves get the sh*ft.

Sent from my Pixel 6a using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by 01110011 (Post 3488248)

Which is why we need some creativity in a new TA. Keep FSB but make them a higher step than “visiting reserves”. Add some pay incentives/more days off.

saying “get rid of FSB” may not be in our best interest re reassignments and it’s not in the company’s best interest re reliability. Would love to see “make FSB more profitable/opt in/better QOL” vs screaming about totally eliminating it which is probably never in the cards. We can score some win/wins if we look beyond the “add pay is god” paradigm of the last TA.

Originally Posted by Larry in TN (Post 3488214)

The airline needs a way to recrew flights on short notice when they get a late sick call, a pilot times out, or a crew misconnects. How do we want them to do that?

One way is with field standby.

Without FSB, there will be a lot more line holder reassignments, one of the things that APA has been complaining about at AAL.

What other options are there that I haven't thought of? How do we want these re-crews to be handled?

I think a big deterrent to bidding a seat where you'll be on reserve is the 12/13 days off per month. That's not enough. I'm not willing to do that. Would it work to have 15/16 days off with reserve pilots able to pickup additional reserve days, for additional pay, down to 12 days, or even 10 days, off? I don't know. I'd look at reserve differently with a system like that.

Originally Posted by Otterbox (Post 3488395)

If they eliminate FSB and rolled days off it will increase staffing requirements, thus opening up more slots at the top end of the pay scale, across all bases. Increased reserve staffing will decrease reserve utilization, greatly improving quality of life. Every other legacy airlines survives without FSB and rolled days off on reserve. United ALPA should be seeking to increase the number of the highest paying union jobs, not getting rid of them.

Originally Posted by elmetal (Post 3488412)

This so much. the entire idea of "global" reserve needs to be dismantled. every other carrier can manage widebody intl flying without this charade.


"oh but they don't do as much of it as we do"

True. But what they DO accomplish they manage to do with ZERO rolling of days. How do we cover all domestic flying without having rolled days? More reserves. We are allowing them to operate with less reserves in the highest paid categories we have. Otterbox is spot on.