Sink r8

What it would also do is penalize guys that simply fly their schedule, or fly less. Assume the total amount of money we're going to wrestle from the company is finite. Whatever is allocated to payrate increases can be distributed evenly, or it can reward overtime especially. Favoring overtime means less money per unit of work in the pockets of those flying normal schedules. 1.5>80 is a method for displacing "raise" money from those pilots who fly normal schedules, to those who fly more.

scambo1

You can use the same argument against greenslips.

Sink r8

I think you are looking at the most innocent and beneficial aspect of OOBS, because you like them.

There is nothing unrealistic about my argument: 1) the SB/SWF system allows pilots to privately steer open time to some, above WS pick-up limits, what I described as mining open time. 2) the OOBWS system allows some flying to be transferred between bases, but (thankfully) within pick-up limits for the pilots concerned, and 3) OOBS would allow greater transfer/mining of open time between bases, to a greater extent.

sailingfun

Or they could hire Russian hackers to steal the trips from the pot and award them before the lines are even built in PBS!
I am against out of base anything beyond what we have but the above is a little far fetched!

Alan Shore

Absolutely true, but how is that different from the current 2X GS system? Does that not also reward overtime and displace what might otherwise have been "raise" money? Again, I'm not sold either way, but I'm all about finding ways to put more money in our collective pockets other than simply in hourly rates.

Alan Shore

One could say the same about you looking at the most egregious aspect because you don't.

In any case, I'm not sold either way. I do know that other pilot groups, e.g., SWA, have it and like it.

I'm not saying that it's not possible. I'm saying that I find it unlikely that a group of pilots would select one of their own to bid a base in which none of them wants to be in order to mine that base's trips, trips that they could all hold on their own were they each to bid there.

I agree that, to the extent of drops and pickups, some amount of time in one base would be flown by pilots in another base. The question is whether the "harm" in that is worse than allowing some pilots to drop trips they don't want and others to pick up flying when their category shows little to no open time.

Sink r8

Not really. For starters, no schedule is ever published with a GS in it.

Let's say our category pays $100/hour. Say the ALV is 83. Using 1.5>80, PBS might build me a line at 90 hours where I get paid $9,500, or an average of $105.56/hour, and you might get a line of 80 hours, paid $100/hour on average. You might be senior, but that's just the way the cookie crumbles under PBS.

So right there, the 1.5>80 system has penalized a pilot on an arbitrary basis, disregarding seniority. It's built in.

The GS system, which the 1.5>80 would either replace contractually, or make irrelevant in practice, creates no such inequity, because the flying is not routine. But, in a tight staffing situation, it does come into play, and it then rewards pilots for helping the company's problem. In doing so, it changes the average rate of that pilot, bit it does it 1) by respecting seniority, and 2) by ensuring a distribution of GS throughout the list, before the senior pilot gets a second helping.

1.5>80, OTOH, does not have the second provision listed above, AND it can be bypassed by the loophole of SB/SWF, which confers the right to a senior pilot to pick-up then distribute flying as he sees fit, disregarding any WS pick-up limit. The pilot immediately junior to him would not be able to pick-up the trip, and depending on his social connections, would not get the flying before a junior guy that swapped with the senior-most of the three.

So no, you can't really make the same arguments about the GS system. The GS system comes with protections, but 1.5>80 is a free-for-all, where PBS and other pilots determine who gets a raise, and who doesn't.

Sink r8

Our posts crossed. I highlighted some of the differences in a post to Scambo.

1) GS are not routine, but 1.5>80 can create such inequities as part of the line construction process.
2) WS ARE routine, so they can increase the average payrate differential under 1.5>80.
3) SB/SWF are also routine, and can further increase the differential based upon who you know, not seniority.
4) When GS do come into play, they come with protections.

Check Essential

It's not too far-fetched. The flight attendants have been doing it for years.
The Portland mafia was incredibly efficient at harvesting trips until management cracked down on them.

Sink r8

Well, I can only guess as to how widespread these practices are, but we don't need to focus on what Sink r8 thinks might be happening, or knows is happening, or bring names and examples into the picture.

It's simply sufficient to remind everyone of trip parking. It was there, and the union stepped in. Is there any reason to think the guys that found that loophole are too stupid to find others?

Not everyone that likes the idea of 1.5>80 is a scheming [deleted]. In fact, many, most people that like it, like it for reasons that are completely innocent and rational. It really sounds like a nice concept, on paper. The same is true of OOBS. It's just that I'm trying to think of the unintended consequences.

When looking at things people advocate for, I usually find that it's about money, and it's often about steering money from one party to another. It's a good idea to identify the winners and losers. Poaching open time, or other bases' open time, or steering juuust a little bit of extra coin my way seem like such victimless crimes, when you think about the group as a whole. Not so much when you really identify the pocket the money comes out of, and the money it ends up in.

I would advise a LOT of critical thinking in this area.