ConfCodeCOOL

... So you want a $17500 bonus because they give new hires a 17500 bonus? What would you be willing to give up in order to get it? Because they wouldn't give us that free.
Also, with all due respect you're wrong, the 19-20 day off schedules were when we were well staffed... because the floor wasn't raised, and there was a better mix of pairings. Right now they are absolutely making the pairings cover as much flying as possible... not by block hours but when you look at the legs.

I agree on some of your points though. This was a real missed opportunity to get some of the stuff in the contract we needed in the contract, for 2 more years, like you said the operational necessity language and other language that needs cleaning up.

GoHomeLeg

I get your point with the floor being raised effecting days off. But having 30 hour overnights in many cities every night definitely effects efficiency. If we deadhead those crews out there would be additional legs they could fly. If we multiply that by 3 cities there are 6 less pilots that are needed. Further multiplied by a month now you really start to see savings created through efficiency.

It is my opinion that at compass we are using schedule inefficiency as a way to keep crew members in the system for more days so they can be reassigned at the company's discretion. In essence creating a reserve pool.

As for the bonus, I did not say that we need the $17,500. I said any future bonus increases should be given to all. Meaning if they want to raise it to $20,000 then every pilot on property should be given an additional $2,500 bonus. I hope you see the difference. Doing this continues to allow the company to throw straight cash at their recruiting problems as they see fit but also gives them incentive to look for other, perhaps more cost conscious ways to recruit by improving on Quality of Life issues that have been created recently.

Fr8Thrust

I hope you’re all using your 4 commuter hotels as much as possible, since the company considers them compensation, which is not reimbursed should you not use them.

I understand if you have commutable pairings, or short base sits, but if you live in base, it’s really easy to check in before/after your trip on your drive to/fr work. At least take advantage of the free breakfast or coffee, or not having to clean the sheets after, if you know what I mean.

ConfCodeCOOL

Pretty much the only place I've seen the 30 hour overnights out of Seattle is YEG and I think there's a few MFR in March but like... four. Same thing with SAT in February but only 4. There is one leg in and one leg out a day on Delta to YEG. Plane flies in at midnight, plane flies out at 6am... nowhere you can deadhead to unless they deadhead us on Alaska and they can't/won't do that. It's not a large amount of our pairings. And I am sure Compass would like to be rid of it just as much as they scramble to staff flying. Up to the codeshare partner though.

Av8rPHX

The ultra long YEG layover was a compromise to not make it a stand up anymore.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

GoHomeLeg

Fair enough. I'll conceded my point specifically about the 30 hour overnights but I'll stand by my assertion that schedule inefficiency is the primary driver keeping you from getting the most days off possible and not necessarily staffing.

ConfCodeCOOL

You're both right and wrong at the same time. It's true that if the schedules were more efficient, we'd get more days off, even while being short staffed. But the inefficient schedules are partly due to the low staffing. It's not simply a matter of "750 block hours, 10 75 hour lines, done". Because a bulk of the flying can be concentrated on the weekend, or in the morning, or the early evening. It's more like "4 crews needed this day, 6 crews needed this day, 7 crews needed this day" and what you see as an inefficient 4 hours on day 5 is you fulfilling that higher crew butt in seat on that day. With only 11 days off, you're always covering some leg somewhere.
Let me put it this way. On Thursday, and Friday, and every day afterwards, you've got SEA SNA SEA legs. And now an afternoon SEA GEG. If you build it as a SEA SNA day trip it's very efficient. But now that lone SEA GEG leg needs to be the start of another trip. Now 2 crews are needed. Or... you kill the day trip and make that crew sit for 4 hours in base and do that one leg into GEG. Now they cover your early AM GEG into SEA on Friday and one less crew is needed. Think crews per day, not hours per day. If you actually look at the Seattle 5 day pairings you totally see this in action, with late starts on day 1 and early finishes on day 5. Day 1 is covering the late night stuff and the pairings shift and cover the early. They're very efficient in the sense of covering all the legs, completely inefficient for us in terms of sits and productivity and days off, but that isn't how the company is building them or anything that they care about.
So, I'd say you're correct in looking at it from the perspective of the individual lineholder, but not the pairing mix and covering every leg of flying as a whole.

poorflyer

This probably explains why our American flying has 2+ hour sits everyday now. Can't wait for that to go away.

Poser765

no kidding. It's getting harder and harder hitting on the ready reserve FAs over in the box with all the extra crews sitting around the crew room over there.

They be wasting my flavor.

poorflyer

Right! I walk in there and 3 Captains are already bragging about how their '05 Corolla is almost paid off. I can't compete with that!