fdx727pilot

Might help if you posted what jet/domicile those pairings pertain to. It looks like you are attributing three pilots to A300 trips and 2 to 727 trips

TonyC

I made a few corrections and enhanced your chart.


Click on the dates to look at the Trip Recap for each Disputed Pairing. (Access to FedEx VIPS required, of course.)




#-#-#-#-#- MEM A-300 DISPUTED PAIRINGS -#-#-#-#-#-

Trip 495 01MAY07, 02MAY07, 03MAY07, 04MAY07
Trip 495 08MAY07, 09MAY07, 10MAY07, 11MAY07
Trip 430 11MAY07
Trip 495 15MAY07, 16MAY07, 17MAY07, 18MAY07
Trip 495 22MAY07, 23MAY07, 24MAY07, 25MAY07


#-#-#-#-#- MEM B-727 DISPUTED PAIRINGS -#-#-#-#-#-

Trip 193 30APR07
Trip 241 30APR07
Trip 243 01MAY07, 02MAY07, 03MAY07
Trip 107 07MAY07
Trip 192 07MAY07
Trip 242 07MAY07
Trip 243 08MAY07, 09MAY07, 10MAY07
Trip 108 14MAY07
Trip 192 14MAY07
Trip 242 14MAY07
Trip 243 15MAY07, 16MAY07, 17MAY07
Trip 108 21MAY07
Trip 192 21MAY07
Trip 242 21MAY07
Trip 243 22MAY07, 23MAY07, 24MAY07


#-#-#-#-#- ANC MD-11 DISPUTED PAIRINGS -#-#-#-#-#-

Trip 125 01MAY07
Trip 108 21MAY07
Trip 165 23MAY07


#-#-#-#-#- DISPUTED PAIRING -#-#-#-#-#-

ALPA's founders chose "Schedule with Safety" as our motto. Support the SIG/PSIT in upholding that standard-- Don't fly disputed pairings!




.

FlybyKnite

TonyC you are my hero!!

I was going for the simple, uncluttered motif ; but, you have created a masterpiece!!

How much do I owe for services as editor and personal interpreter?

And Yes, I have proved once again that Public Math is very risky and in most cases extremely embarassing!

.

TonyC

This might be worthy of a separate thread, but I decided to instead add it to the "Disputed Pairing" thread with the most recent activity.

I had the opportunity to attend the Joint LEC meeting in Memphis this past Wednesday, and listened to the presentation given by Capt Jim Ingalls about the FedEx Scheduling Committee. One of the subjects he discussed was the Disputed Pairing Process.

At the conclusion of his presentation, I asked 2 question. First, recognizing that once pairings are identified as disputed, pilots can fly them voluntarily in any of a number of ways, or involuntarily by leaving them in Open Time and having them assigned to pilots on Reserve, how does flying them voluntarily affect the Scheduling Committee's credibility, ALPA FedEx MEC's credibility, the credibility of FedEx pilots as a group, and the Disputed Pairing Resolution process itself?

Second, is there any legitimate reason why a FedEx pilot should not know what pairings are disputed for his airplane?

He chose to answer the second question first. Given that the pilot should receive multiple e-mails -- the SIG letter, Message Line e-mails, etc. -- and the availability of the same information on the ALPA FedEx MEC website, the only reason that a pilot would not know what pairings in his airplane are disputed would be willful ignorance.

As to the impact of flying the disputed pairings by volunteers, he confirmed that is speaks volumes to the Company. In one case in particular, when an identified pairing was consistently left in Open Time, not only was the pairing revised, but a new Soft Parameter was added to the Pairing Construction matrix. On the opposite end of the spectrum, when another particular pairing was consistently picked up out of open time, when pilots traded out of week on/week off schedules to pick it up (they look deeper than just the pay code, they look at how aggressively they're picked up), it became obvious that the dispute would not be upheld, and it was dropped. It undermines credibility, and unnecessarily expends Union resources, to dispute a pairing when the crewforce is sending an opposing message by voluntarily flying the disputed pairings.


He admitted that he could put the most onerous pairing conceivable between two deadheads and someone would pick it up out of open time. However, they do not Dispute pairings for frivolous reasons. If it's disputed, it has been carefully examined and does not meet the standards they feel we deserve. Think about that as you contemplate making your schedule or paycheck suit your desires.

Does your MEC Scheduling Committee speak for you, or are you an independent contractor?





.

Busboy

Good work!!

md11phlyer

With open time coming out tomorrow I would like to get this thread back to the front of the board. For those of you who still have a hard time recognizing disputed pairings, here is the list from the SIG email.

A-300: #430 is disputed for being onerous. It needs only a few minutes for the crew to go over eight hours requiring the layover in SAN to double the block. In addition, it needs only a slight delay in MEM and/or LBB to go over scheduled rest limitations. Any crew scheduled for this needs the day prior and afterwards off to fly the trip.


#495 is disputed for unrealistic scheduling. The flight has changed to an A300 from an A310. The historic data is based on an A310, which crews have told us fly fast to meet the ramp's constraints. The A300 cannot fly as fast and the scheduled block is 12 minutes shorter than what was scheduled last year. The analysis from April of last year showed that it pushes late from the Hub and is late arriving into the Hub. The arrival time into YYC is in the middle of rush hour and makes for a long ride to the hotel and the departure is in the middle of the evening rush hour.


727: #241, #242, #243, (D) these pairings are being disputed for fatigue. This is the third month for this trip construction to be in dispute. The specific issue is the ORD-IND-IAD-MEM duty period. The turn in IND is under 4 hours and the IAD stop is in excess of 1:30. Total duty is 11:02. The IAD extended ground time is fatiguing, this coupled with the long duty period are the reason for the dispute.


#107, #108, #192, #193, (D) This route LCK-IND-BOS-EWR habitually runs late. After a 3:45 hub turn in IND the trip continues into the North East to BOS. The early AM passenger flight congestion has already started, holding inbound is not uncommon. The trip then has to get in the ATC cue for clearance to EWR at the height of the morning Continental Airlines recovery. Ground holds, reroutes and holding are common, on a clear day. Average delays into EWR are reaching 35 to 45 minutes, and have exceeded 1+20. In March at least 2 trips never reached EWR. Duty limits aside, this trip is onerous and fatiguing.


MD11 MEM: NONE


MD11 ANC: #108 This two week trip is difficult. These are medium to long duties. Every layover (except the one reset) is either a body clock swap or a ready sleep now from an SFS hub turn.


#125 The ALPA SIG feels that this two week trip has a second week that is tough. 3 hub turn events into two body clock swaps after the reset is onerous and a fatigue issue.


#165 This is disputed due to a live leg DH after the all night HNL-LAX being onerous and fatiguing. The body clock swap after this segment adds an additional fatigue problem.


MD11LAX: NONE


DC10: NONE

There they are, get the info out, educate the ignorant and support the SIG.

Fly safe!
phlyer

Magenta Line

Nice work TonyC!

I know a couple of SIG members who have explained to me the time and $$$ involved in the DP process and that by leaving a DP untouched in open time it DEFINITELY sends a loud and clear message.

By the same token though, when those independent contractors virgorously scratch and claw over themselves to get to a DP another type of message is also sent.

Just goes to show you that this DP process is not a game of checkers; it's a game of chess in 3-D.

Support your SIG! Don't voluntarily fly DP's!

Check 6

After reading the prior 4 posts does anyone have any questions on why flying the DP's is wrong. Wrong for the pilots and wrong for the Union???

Buehler...Buehler

Open Mind want to continue to justify your anti-hive mind...?

fdxflyer

Just ran into some new hires who were discussing DP's and saying they did not really know anything about them. I gave them a quick run down!

This made me question whether the union is getting this message through in the first meeting with the new hires during indoc. Surely they are, but my conversation made me think not!

Regardless, we need to be better mentors to these guys. We need to identify new hires when we fly with them, and add this to the list of things we assist them with in their attempt to acclimate to life on the line! Not a dinner should go by with a new hire that this has not been discussed in my opinion. It seems that they are all willing listeners, but someone has to be the one to bring this to their attention.

Lifizgud

Plus, since these new hires may eventually get to fly one of these off reserve, that should DRIVE home the fact that they suck. I remember as a new hire asking myself "why do they call this the BOS-IND Death March?" , and then I got it while on reserve and it absolutely kicked my a$$... That little lesson thoroughly convinced me to NEVER pick up a disputed pairing - these guys know what they are talking about!!