Klondike Bear

What about a compromise? 1.5X above 75 hours until 90 hours. Over 90 it has to be a Greenslip.

RockyBoy

What about no GS trigger?



I also think a GS Raw score would level out the GS hours some get. You might get 2 GS's a month and a guy down the list might get 2 GS's a month. What if both of yours are 1 day GS's and the guy down the list lucks out and gets a couple of 3 day GS's? You have half the GS pay with the same amount of GS's. GS Raw score would award the GS to the lowest GS raw score and not be dependent on how many GS's you have already gotten.

overspeed

Anything that allows a premium(1.5 or 2.0) above a threshold will reduce the number of greenslips. Those that make money on greenslips probably don't want an incentive for white-slipping above a certain threshold. Those that don't, want an increase in pay above a threshold. A potential compromise is we could have a 1.5 above 75 up to the ALV, and keep the white-slip pickup limit. This would drive a cost for having the higher ALVs in the busy months, and still help the folks that pick up time. It would still drive staffing requirements down(a big negative IMO).
I think holiday pay is a great idea and it seems would benefit a lot of people.

RockyBoy

I'm not sure why we don't have 2x pay for holidays already.



Red-Eye override would be awesome. I think JetBlue gets $15/hr between 0100-0500 base time.



I think the biggest must have is a 5:15 minimum day.


5:15 a day for training days.

Bert Sampson

Everything except the minimum day. I don't want to work more.

Herkflyr

He's saying 5.15 minimum PAY per day, not min required block hours per day. That is as opposed to our current *Average* Daily Guarantee of 5.15 a day.

As for the min day guarantee that a lot are touting...not to say that it isn't worth pursuing, but a lot of guys:

a. Are not acknowledging how vastly superior our ADG is compared to how things were for many, many years prior to getting it, as I've posted many times in the past.

b. Are not acknowledging that there might be some drawbacks to it. You may see a significant reduction in commutable trips, for example--or not.

The idea is worth pursuing though.

TED74

How is this relevant in a discussion of what people want in their next contract?

Herkflyr

Fair question. Perhaps I'm channeling some earlier posts (not here) where guys were portraying the ADG as some sort of failure because it didn't provide for a min pay per day.

In fact it is a significant improvement over earlier years.

I suppose the logical thing would be to pursue min day guarantee as a natural follow on to ADG....

crewdawg

Sub-90% on a WB and I have no desire to see this system put in place. Our current GS system is just fine.

Sub-90% and I received a few green slips this summer. I also passed up a dozen more due to being out of town on various mini vacations on my off days. 2 of the GS I flew were weekday trips as were many of the ones I passed up. I remember being about 60% on a NB and consistently seeing GS's going junior to me due to availability or FAR117...it is what it is. I see no reason to change it because of "perceived" unfairness.

This reminds me of the Captain in the DTW crew room last negotiating . cycle that was going on and on about GS. He wanted to get rid of GS's because he thought it wasn't fair that his FOs were making more than him and that he "couldn't get greenslips," because he commuted...

TED74

MD and ADG in concert together will likely produce more densely-packed flying/dead-heading and drastically reduce commutability. Personally, I'm fine with this as someone who doesn't commute and I'd rather have fewer days at work for the same credit. I'm not sure I'll feel the same way once I'm into my 50s and 60s with little kids having grown and left the house and who knows if I'll haveto commute down the road.

In my NB category I'm already hearing commuters complain about overall trip construction, and how tired/sick the last quarter's flying/commuting has made them. Before we go all in on min day (particularly a full 5:15 min day and not something less) I think it would be wise to use Carmen to model what bid packs would look like under such new assumptions. The group may or may not be real excited about what we'd get, particularly if variety were drastically reduced. There are lots of ways to adhere efficiently to 5:15 ADG (with and without long layovers), but fewer ways to meet ADG and MD.

I've seen some SWA rotations that are very productive... but they aren't what I'd want to fly my whole career. Variety is partly what drew me to Delta and I'd hate to see that fall off significantly. Without some accurate modeling, the result of (ADG + MD) seems like a big unknown to me.