Disputed Pairing?
#11
Wow, I can see it now. A 61 year old nonmember flying disputed pairings, only after bidding back to the left seat of the maddog! (probably voted for the LOA as well as the CBA, and Hillary).
PS. He likes oreos from his jumpseaters, listens to old beatles albums, lives in Memphis and uses a pc instead of an apple computer.
PS. He likes oreos from his jumpseaters, listens to old beatles albums, lives in Memphis and uses a pc instead of an apple computer.
I was in agreement until the pc comment. I like apples, but can only afford a Dell.
#12
#13
Why though, would you want guys on reserve to fly these trips?
Since people decide to pick up these trips, is there anything at all to be gained from flying them?
Do other airlines have DP's?
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: Retired
Posts: 3,717
It's a contractual thing. As for other airlines having DP's, I'd guess that they might or might not be called that, but all airlines have trips that don't allow the crew enough rest, or any of the other problems that you've learned about here. We're fortunate in that our agreement allows pilot input into the process.
#15
Doesn't the FAA have rules about how long a pilot can work/fly/be on duty before getting mandatory rest? If the company builds a line that is facially legal but really is not, wouldn't the pilot only get himself into FAA limitation trouble by flying it? How does he report it without fudging the logs?
As I understand it, any trip requires at least two flight crew members. Doesn't this mean that two of your brethren are voluntarily committing this egregious error?
Is there any data as to what happens to people who chose to fly these pairings? For example, do they call in sick more frequently? What does the rest of their schedule look like for the month?
I'm sorry if these questions seem sophomoric, but this appears to be an ongoing bone of contention. And it's more interesting that discussing jumpseats purchased with cookies.
As I understand it, any trip requires at least two flight crew members. Doesn't this mean that two of your brethren are voluntarily committing this egregious error?
Is there any data as to what happens to people who chose to fly these pairings? For example, do they call in sick more frequently? What does the rest of their schedule look like for the month?
I'm sorry if these questions seem sophomoric, but this appears to be an ongoing bone of contention. And it's more interesting that discussing jumpseats purchased with cookies.
#16
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: 767 FO
Posts: 8,047
The trips are contracturally legal and meet all the FARs; does not make them safe.
One guy can pick up the trip (bad) and the other could be on reserve (no choice).
The rest of their schedule is a normal schedule they just pick up the extra trip to make a little extra cash or to get an extra day at home.
One guy can pick up the trip (bad) and the other could be on reserve (no choice).
The rest of their schedule is a normal schedule they just pick up the extra trip to make a little extra cash or to get an extra day at home.
#17
The trips are LEGAL, they are just onerous or wildly optimistic. For example - depart MEM at 0330 and fly to BOS. Arrive BOS at 0630L, then depart BOS at 0705 and fly to EWR, arriving at 0800.
The trip as built is legal under the contract for duty in the critical period, but everything must go exactly right. Try turning through BOS during the morning push in 35 minutes, or getting into EWR without any delays during the Continental morning launch. Ain't gonna happen, and thus the SIG disputes the pairing as unrealistic.
If you fly the pairing you are not violating any FARs - the pairings are legal, just painful or unrealistic.
As to reserves flying DPs - that is the only way that a pairing can stay disputed. If guys voluntarily pick up DPs out of open time after 3 months the company can say "This trip can't be bad - it got flown by lineholders 75% of the time." If the trip stays in open time and gets flown only by guys on reserve then it proves the SIG's point that it is an ugly pairing and shouldn't be built into lines.
The trip as built is legal under the contract for duty in the critical period, but everything must go exactly right. Try turning through BOS during the morning push in 35 minutes, or getting into EWR without any delays during the Continental morning launch. Ain't gonna happen, and thus the SIG disputes the pairing as unrealistic.
If you fly the pairing you are not violating any FARs - the pairings are legal, just painful or unrealistic.
As to reserves flying DPs - that is the only way that a pairing can stay disputed. If guys voluntarily pick up DPs out of open time after 3 months the company can say "This trip can't be bad - it got flown by lineholders 75% of the time." If the trip stays in open time and gets flown only by guys on reserve then it proves the SIG's point that it is an ugly pairing and shouldn't be built into lines.
#18
Does the company benefit financially from building such a pairing? FedEx's motto is something about packages being on time. So take the BOS example above. Even the dumbest person among us knows that those times will never be met, so presumably the entire cargo is late. Customers get upset. I know I would particularly if I have something very time sensitive. After a while, you would think that the company can add two and two together and get four. Right? Or is one or two late shipments something the company is willing to accept as a cost of doing business?
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: 767 FO
Posts: 8,047
"The World on Time". A lot of the DPs are repositioning flights (mostly empty) on the last leg. But some are revenue. In the Boston flight above, it probably just takes some extra frieght that didn't make the "main" flight. Priority One freight is the major concern with the company and they will put it on a reliable flight if available.
#20
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post