FedEx-disputed pairings
03-27-2009, 06:34 AM
#21
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,931
At times like this it seems like bickering about disputed pairings is just ridiculous. I know the SIG puts in alot of time and thought to getting our pairings right. Not that it hasn't served its purpose in the past but unfortunately, it does not work anymore. We have to make a concerted effort in the next contract to get the scheduling language correct and then let it be. If its in open time then we should be able to swap, drop and pickup as we want to. This junior high, "he did, she did, I never would unless I really needed the days off" bs is dividing us. We don't need this now. Stand together
I'd rather stand together and not do DPs.
McGroin,
I think you should talk to a SIG type. They will be happy to explain via phone or e-mail how numerous pairings are rethought after SIG input before they are put on to your line.
Like the process or not, it is here. The company and the SIG are doing the dance. You saw how taking the SIG out of the line building dance let lines deteriorate. Do you want the pairings to similarly slide?
FDX scheduling does not operate like scheduling elsewhere. They require, by staffing and mentality, the help of the SIG to produce a good product.
So it's in your best interest to support the SIG.
Last edited by Gunter; 03-27-2009 at 07:36 AM. Reason: choosing to explain instead of harass
03-27-2009, 07:48 AM
#22
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,931
Some of these disputed pairings are RIDICULOUS! A DH, followed by 18+ hours off, then 3 legs into MEM. Come on...why is this disputed? Another one is 48 hours off in DSM, 29 hours off in STL, then 3 legs into MEM. I think I can find some time in there to get rested for my whopping 3 legs into MEM...
Disputes:
#87, #92, #228, #229, #230
These pairings all have a tough 3-leg final duty period which shows in the critical rig
The 24 hr layovers will kill you. They look good on paper then they sneek up on you. Especially when followed by long critical duty periods.
You have to ask yourself, if they are itching to save money by optimizing the schedule why a 48 hr domestic layover here? I think it is just to package the pairing to sell.
The sad part -
If we lose this dispute, you can expect other cities to look more like this.
It's always a test to see what the crews will fly...
03-27-2009, 09:24 AM
#24
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Posts: 394
727 SIG notes
Disputes:
#87, #92, #228, #229, #230
These pairings all have a tough 3-leg final duty period which shows in the critical rig
The 24 hr layovers will kill you. They look good on paper then they sneek up on you. Especially when followed by long critical duty periods.
You have to ask yourself, if they are itching to save money by optimizing the schedule why a 48 hr domestic layover here? I think it is just to package the pairing to sell.
The sad part -
If we lose this dispute, you can expect other cities to look more like this.
It's always a test to see what the crews will fly...
Disputes:
#87, #92, #228, #229, #230
These pairings all have a tough 3-leg final duty period which shows in the critical rig
The 24 hr layovers will kill you. They look good on paper then they sneek up on you. Especially when followed by long critical duty periods.
You have to ask yourself, if they are itching to save money by optimizing the schedule why a 48 hr domestic layover here? I think it is just to package the pairing to sell.
The sad part -
If we lose this dispute, you can expect other cities to look more like this.
It's always a test to see what the crews will fly...
Forgive my earlier rant...I see light said the blind man to the deaf one...
03-27-2009, 09:24 AM
#25
Line Holder
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: MD-11 FO
Posts: 95
MEM11 leading the DP charge
Embarrassingly MEM maddog folks are no better. The most DPs of any domicile/aircraft and at last count only 2 left. Looked up one of them and saw a grand total at around 123CHs. Un-effen-believable. 
03-27-2009, 09:27 AM
#26
...Whatever It Is!
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Posts: 4,680
I think I may have jumped the gun a little. I think one of the pairings may killing all of the rest of them. One has horrible reversals in sleep cycles, but it sounds like because of the way the SIG system works, it kills even the ones that might not be that onerous...
Forgive my earlier rant...I see light said the blind man to the deaf one...
Forgive my earlier rant...I see light said the blind man to the deaf one...
And BTW, as of 1325 ET, only one DP remains unfilled in the MEM MD-11 left seat!
03-27-2009, 09:29 AM
#27
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: 777 F/O
Posts: 340
Next contract, hard scheduling parameters, period. It's either legal or it's not. Current contract, ask guys not to fly them and do the best we can. We've beat this horse to death many times over. I think some guys like to hear themselves type.
03-27-2009, 09:36 AM
#28
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: 767 FO
Posts: 8,047
Good Idea, Question; will it cost more or less to get hard parameter in the next contract if we just blow off the DP process now?
03-27-2009, 09:42 AM
#29
...Whatever It Is!
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Posts: 4,680
03-27-2009, 10:34 AM
#30
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jan 2009
Position: Seat 0-A
Posts: 41
If the union can put out a non-members list, why can't they publish a DP flyers list (including CH count)???
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
