404yxl

Yes, I should have clarified that it would have to be scheduled past 11:59PM. You would be pay protected for the extra 4:00 for a calendar day originally scheduled without duty if you extended into the next day, after the schedule was built.

The whole point I am trying to make is that we do not get a min day option if we drop the adtg, so there are circumstances that we can see 4:00 2 days and 8:00 3 days.

People need to be clear on their understanding of this, because non-CDO trips will be made with duty periods that cross into more than 1 calendar day. I just don't want to see people act surprised when 8:00 3 days or 12:00 4 days when they show up on the bid packet or open time. The fact it took so many of you to come around to this idea, that it isn't a min day option, shows that there is a large misconception on what we are deciding.

typical41

Exactly!!!

typical41

Another thing for us to chew on in our decision:

With ADTG...most of the trips where ADTG actually adds credit to a schedule (The worst and most ineffienct trips), are getting awarded to pilots at the bottom end of the bidding seniority in PBS. While it might seem that those pilots are getting added credit, and or added days off, they really are not (At least most of them).

PBS is constrained to a max of 95 and min of 75 hours. Realistically though, by the time the PBS solver gets to the pilots who will be awarded these inefficient trips, those pilots MRLV (minimum required credit to build a complete schedule) is now around 85 to 88 hours. So for every inefficient trip that one of these pilots are awarded, PBS is forced to include a more efficient pairing just to be able to find a solution to their awarded schedule that would meet the higher MRLV. Pretty much, what I am saying is that all these pilots are going to be awarded a schedule with high credit, and close-to or at MinDays off. So they have effectively gained nothing though ADTG, they end up right where they would have been. It is a false gain.

The other credit that is added with ADTG, typically goes to reserves, and very few actually break 75 hours guarantee anyway. Our reserve system does an excellent job of keeping all the reserves below 75 hours.

I don't want to sacrifice getting paid for 30 hour layovers, with something(ADTG) that EFFECTIVELY does nothing in terms of DAYS OFF for our pilots, nor adds much credit. Actually ADTG loses credit....because we gain so much more credit back for every 30 hour layover that we do.

djrogs03

This! ALPA did a snapshot of October and 80% of the flying was awarded this way, 20% of the ADTG credit was above garuntee...

FlyingGorilla

I must be the exception then. I've had lines awarded in the last 6 months with ~75-79 hrs and 14-16 days off. The added credit I got from ADTG actually gave me more days off. Otherwise, I wouldn't have reached 75 hrs and would have had reserve days added to my schedule.

It forces the company to make trips that are well over the 16 hours of guarantee, that 4/4 gives you. Sure you're not technically getting paid during you 30 hrs of binge drinking in SAT, but you're seeing the value of the trip rise overall.

Don't think that the company won't bring back 16 hr 4-days the second they can, because they will. Then they've just screwed the people that need the credit the most, a junior FO trying to actually pay bills.

saturn

Dont forget the junior CA, trying to crack into the middle class.

LGARunway44

I think many would consider an FO with a joint income in the middle class. That bar is pretty low these days. It just doesn't mean anything anymore.

RTRD

I've been a reserve/junior line holder capt. for the duration of this little experiment and I've lost more than I've gained. I saw a lot of 14 day off lines and 19-20 hr block 4 days with 30 hr. overnights that would have paid 23 hrs with credit for those overnights. Or at least would have paid 20 hrs. even if those trips were built to 16 hours block which would be extremely low for Compass. I also only broke guarantee 1 of 3 times on reserve. Just my personal experience, but I was right in the sweet spot of people it should have helped.

crazyjaydawg

[/discussion]

404yxl

Ummm....

Actually, with a lineholder awarded a 90 hour line, it would be a real gain if the adtg is adding credit to a trip that would have less without it.

Not true. Anything that increases reserves trip credits actually helps them break guarantee. With your line of thinking we should take away all credit given to reserves throughout the month because it does not matter. Being short staffed would actually increase reserves chances of breaking guarantee and the adtg increases it further.

Not if the company eliminates 30-hour layovers or we have duty periods that cross 2 calendar days. Per your reasoning we could lose either way.