fecav8r

I'm always amazed when people impose their beliefs on someone else. And then when they do something different they are idiots. We all have different situations in life. For some of us, the time at home is more important. Great. For others, maximizing their paycheck, to the detriment of no one else, is more important. It must be nice to be living the perfect life.

FDXLAG

See this is where we disagree: to the detriment of no one else.

By allowing so much extra flying we are allowing the company to get a way with fewer pilots. That means fewer captains slots for me to upgrade into. I understand the allure of working your arse off. I sort of understand the advantage of when things slow down fewer dudes to fight over reduced hours. But there is also an inherent advantage to all to have more pilot slots on the seniority list. And Carryover with CIC and leveling does hurt others.

Just my opinion.

4A2B

BINGO, we have a winner. For those that enjoy time at home AND money, fewer Captain seats is a detriment.

Albief15

Something else to consider...

Carryover is a drag when someone else is holding a seat you want. I sat 2.5 years on the 727 panel...much less than a lot of guys hired here in the past and the current crop of SOs, but much much more than some of the 90s and postal wave hirees.

However, a slightly leaner model also means downtimes don't result is as many downgrades and displacement bids, and even under the current pain we haven't had to furlough. Our leaner model does give the company some elasticity in their manning during lean times.

The alternative and more traditional model is a max cap on hours, and excess flying is then done at premium pay. A LOT of hard-core trade-unionists like this model, and they have some solid arguments. However, academic arguments often get blurry when facing fiscal realities. The problem with the idea that you'll upgrade sooner is tempered by the fact you'll also face more displacing training cycles during down times. That premium pay? In almost 8 years here as a commuter I've been called once (as a 727 FO) for a draft trip. If your phone number doesn't start with 901 or 662, or you aren't a flex or LCA, odds are any gains made with an extra draft trip here or there will not be spread equitably around the bidpack, but rather concentrated geograhically around hub cities. So..for a commuter...I see any restrictions on carryover, makeup, etc as a potential pay cut.

Companies that strive to stay lean tend to ultimately make the most money for the guys who work there. SWA was build around "greedy pilots" who want to fly. I don't care if a guy just wants to fly 74 hours a month, but why should we penalize someone who wants to work harder? The "comfort point" for one person might be 74 hours, another might be 80, and so on... Taken to the absurd, we could demand to fly ONE trip a month for full BLG and everyone on the property could be a widebody captain. At some point, however, economic reality mixes in and you see the corporation cannot price a product to compete using that model....we'd have to have 20,000 or more pilots. I would argue that part of the reason FedEx can pay us what they do (and should pay more, actually...) is that because we ARE effective, efficient workers we help generate the profits that make all of this possible. The better we work as a collective group, the more money we ALL make to spread around. If FedEx makes X numbers of dollars moving X tons of packages a year, would you rather have labor's cut of the pie be divided into 4500 pieces or 5500 pieces? I'd like as big of a slice as I can get...thanks. I'd love to be at the top of my seat list too....but the fact that our guys work hard and are good at what they do is precisely why we are necessary and can get paid what we do.

Next...show me ONE carrier with a cap/bank or min overtime policy that doesn't have pilots on the street. The model here, as FECAV8OR pointed out, is "different". At times...that's a disadvantage. At times, it is also an advantage. The three companies I know of that don't cap hours are UPS, FDX, and SWA. Although everyone is feeling pinched at the moment, none of those companies have furloughed. My opinion only, but I prefer a slightly delayed seat progression for long term career stability. Prior to 9/11, folks didn't come to FedEx because of industry leading rates, but rather because with stable growth they knew they had the potential for greater CAREER earnings. The nuggets got a taste of a "properly manned" airline, and what it got them was a few years of good pay but also now a pay cut and a change of domicile when things went south. If you look at the *****ing going on in EWR at CAL right now about movement of flying to CLE and other issues you get a glimpse of the fact stability also has a certain value.

Another point...at a certain pay rate, whatever was objectionable at one point becomes acceptable or desired. Would you pick up aluminum cans on the side of a road for $5 an hour? Would you do it for $25 an hour? How many hours can I get you to pick up cans at $400 an hour? The point is, the more I offer you, the more likely I think you are willing to work for me. What if I said I can only pay you $400 an hour, but I need some extra work done on Saturday and Sunday? I would not pick up cans for $5 an hour on any day, and for $50 an hour I'd stay home on my weekend...but there is price point you can get me off my duff and on the street doing the work. This is my point....if we negotiate a rate that EVERY pilot could meet their needs on only 70 hours a month, there would still be some guys who would like to make a little more and would be willing to work extra. I would suggest that the higher the payrate, the more guys would work, and the less workers you'd ultimately need. That is basic human nature, and the idea that we'd all suddenly be "satisfied" with 75 hours of pay at the next upgrade rate ignores how our psyches work and basic human instinct. By the same token, a pilot may decide that a trip at straight pay is "worth it" at a certain point. The higher the rate, the more likely I think we'll see guys diving on open time trips. That is basic human nature. Look at the difference in the amount of trips in open time on the panel verses the left seat...everything's lean these days but not that long ago you'd find a bunch of SO trips available but hardly ever a captain's trip. Why? Three legs to Peoria might not make sense at SO pay, but when a captain can make a car payment (or two) for a nights work it suddenly seems worth doing.

Next...who am I to say how much you should or should not work? We all joined this company knowing the system. Some folks came here because they knew they could work extra. Personally, I love the ability to scale my work up to meet financial goals (in normal times) or also to drop an entire month of work (and I've done that a few times too) for family or military obligations. I'm a little hesistant to say "yeah...I know this system has worked for 30 years, and allowed a healthy number of folks to retire with a full pension....but after 7 years here I want to change us to look more like CAL or United..." I see a lot of unintended consequences of such a move, and I think any moves should be made looking at the total career earnings and lifestyle in mind, not just a short term upgrade that you might end up giving back in the next economic downturn.

And one final point...these are my thoughts alone. I know I'm about 180 out from a lot of folks, and I mean no disrespect. We all just want to live our dreams out, take care of our families, and enjoy doing something we love. Lots of different ideas on the best way to get there, but as a guy who has chatted with litterally thousands of pilots from other companies over the last few years, I'm just hesistant to chunk a system that while not perfect has done a pretty good job for a lot of folks over the years.

And no...I can't hold carryover on the MD-11...

Piloto Noche

Ok, gotta jump here.
The capping of BLGs doesn't have to be a permanent change.

I always thought our union approached the company for an LOA that would cap BLGs only when 4A2B was in effect. That seemed like a pretty simple solution to me and would have eliminated a lot of excesses.
Am I wrong? And if I'm right, why didn't the company go for that?

FDXLAG

Albie, nice thesis. IMO it is a Red Herring to compare the cap and bank to guys on the street. You ignore the impact on competition and the fact that a passenger carrier that isn't named SW doesn't make a profit.

You also lose me when you start saying C/O is a drag but then go into a speil on cap and bank. Although they create similar problems the two issues are not the same. Carryover encourages flying way beyond your BLG and is a way to cheat seniority. If I want to sit reserve in November I will bid C/O in October so I can start November with some leveling. That puts me behind all the guys senior to me sitting reserve.

Likewise CIC allows me to cherry pick the good trips out of the pool. While seniority does come into play when the trips are assigned, it is not first hired gets first choice; it is first hired with C/O gets first choice. You have to fly extra in order to take advantage of the good deal.

In short. You make fine argument against a cap and bank. But you make no argument against restricting C/O. If a guys wants to fly extra; no problem (non 4A2b) but lets not make it too easy on him by keeping C/O as it is currently used.

Heck put all them CIC trips into open time and then we can all have a shot a flying extra.

You may be OK with extra flying; my question is: Are you OK with encouraging extra flying? P.S. As I have been excessed back into your block, this is a serious block rep question. Maybe a good question for your lunch this week.

CactusCrew

Just for the record, there is a cap at UPS. There's more to it than this below, because of our 13 pay periods / 7 bid periods a year, BUT the highlights are ...

A crewmember will neither be scheduled for, nor may he
exceed, two hundred and eight (208) hours of credited time in
each bid period (56 days).

And the jury is still out on our furlough mitigation MOU ... April 2010 is another deadline.

FDXLAG

Because they like flying the HKG guys and 757 at BLG + 30% while everyone else is at BLG -30%. Perhaps it is to bust up unity or maybe it just allows them to train guys at their own schedule without having to ramp up any school houses.

Gunter

You are not 180 out from me.

We should let guys, in normal times, fly near as much as they want. To avoid the huge cuts in individual line flying hours during the next downturn we need to let folks fly extra in the good times.

The alternative is to go cap and bank which is otherwise known as the furlough every downturn model. It might not turn out like you hope. Making your high 5 will not work for some. Flying heavy for 8 months and taking it easy in the 4 months of your choosing will no longer be possible. For those who want to take a month off, too bad. Cap and bank also forces you to work every month. You will bump up against some new restrictions and limits. Ones you didn't ask the MEC and NC to add will crop up. You know how deals with the company go.

Our ability to drop trips will likely go away as part of the deal. None of the other airlines with this system allow pilots to simply "drop."


Once we open up this door it will get ugly, IMHO. Unintended consequences WILL occur. Do you think the company will give away carryover without something juicy in return?

Gunter

So you're saying you can get 1456 hrs of credit per year? Hmmm.....

Not much of a cap.