Time and a half above ALV + 7.5 C2019
09-20-2018, 03:48 AM
#41
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 1,760
More people would dump their lines, no one could swap days or PD due to coverage, reserves would get hammered. We need the trigger.
This would only work if we dumped the provision that everyone gets a crack at the first GS before awarding someone a 2nd GS. This way would probably be more fair, but 10x more complicated. I like the current GS as-is.
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.
09-21-2018, 03:30 PM
#43
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,111
That’s exactly what has been discussed over the last 1.69 pages of discussion. Folks (me included) stating that the junior guys (even in junior categories) get stuck with ****ty weekend trips so they 1) aren’t available to accept GS#1, and 2) they are less likely to be able to drop said ****ty trip in order to make themselves available for GS #1, especially when the category hasn’t had a positive reserve coverage in 6 months and levels are so bad even the APD aren’t getting approved.
The senior guys who can actually get weekends off in their initial bid award, thereby making themselves available for when a majority of the greenies drop, will get 4 or 5 in a month when the junior guy can’t even get the ARCOS call for #1.
Not saying it’s right....not saying it’s wrong....not saying it needs to be changed...just saying thats how it actually plays out in execution.
The senior guys who can actually get weekends off in their initial bid award, thereby making themselves available for when a majority of the greenies drop, will get 4 or 5 in a month when the junior guy can’t even get the ARCOS call for #1.
Not saying it’s right....not saying it’s wrong....not saying it needs to be changed...just saying thats how it actually plays out in execution.
09-22-2018, 01:27 AM
#44
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 767A
Posts: 791
1.5 X over 80 is why it took several years more to upgrade at NW. Everyone in every category flying 10% more every month = no movement for several years.
In my category, the pilots on reserve get more GSs than the senior ones, like Sailing said. Senior guys often run into 117 issues.
Holiday pay is definitely a good idea.
In my category, the pilots on reserve get more GSs than the senior ones, like Sailing said. Senior guys often run into 117 issues.
Holiday pay is definitely a good idea.
09-22-2018, 04:56 AM
#45
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2010
Position: 320B
Posts: 369
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.
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.
09-22-2018, 06:36 AM
#46
Moderator
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Posts: 5,807
So what's the idea behind deferring credit time over XX hours into the next month? Apparently we used to have it and they're asking about it on the survey. The only small advantage I see is if it counts toward the GS trigger.
09-22-2018, 08:25 AM
#47
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,599
It’s a huge advantage in terms of pilots needed. The way it worked was you only got paid for the cap each month. Normally that was 75 hours. If your line exceeded that max you still only got 75 hours pay and the rest carried into the following month and was called bow wave. When your total credit got high enough that your shortest trip could be dropped without putting you below 75 hours it dropped automatically with no pay. Southwest Airlines has nailed the coffin shut and buried those kinds of work rules very deep. I am guessing it would require 2500 more pilots at Delta.
09-22-2018, 04:53 PM
#48
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2013
Position: A320 Left seat
Posts: 2,591
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.
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.
I wouldn’t be against getting contract language that required the company to work harder with the RCC to build a certain percent more productive trips but I also want commutable trips for myself and the other commuters. I don’t know what the right answer is, but it’s somewhere in the middle, as always. Getting a 6 hour min daily guarantee would destroy commutable trips. But I’ve seen some 4day trips that are worth 24-25 hours. It’s fine to have some, but not all, in my opinion,because commuters won’t want to spend two nights a week in a crash pad or hotel.
I know, I know...commuting is a choice.
09-22-2018, 05:38 PM
#49
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2012
Posts: 589
It’s a terrible idea. You’d never get a gs because all the senior guys would pick up everything for 150%. I’m sure the company likes this idea, but we as a pilot group shouldn’t want this
Last edited by MrBojangles; 09-22-2018 at 05:59 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
