Management Presents "plan" To Afa

[BoeingBoy]

Pit,

Here is an actual pairing (hope the tab spacing doesn't get screwed up and make it hard to read).

EQ FLT DEP TIME BLK TIME ARR L/O LOADS MEALS
734 0544* CLT 16:00 (02:04) 18:04 BOS 01:26
733 1027 BOS 19:30 (01:30) 21:00 PHL 01:00
733 0471 PHL 22:00 (01:15) 23:15 PIT 09:45
REST:R1
DUTY BLK DH 1/2 MIN 1/3.50 T RIG VMin T PAY
08:30 04:49 00:00 00:00 00:00 0:00 00:00 04:45 04:49
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EQ FLT DEP TIME BLK TIME ARR L/O LOADS MEALS
734 1211 PIT 09:00 (02:42) 11:42 FLL 20:48
REST:C1
DUTY BLK DH 1/2 MIN 1/3.50 T RIG VMin T PAY
03:57 02:42 00:00 00:00 00:00 0:00 00:00 02:42 02:42
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EQ FLT DEP TIME BLK TIME ARR L/O LOADS MEALS
734 0490* FLL 08:30 (02:40) 11:10 PHL 02:20
734 1035 PHL 13:30 (02:50) 16:20 MIA 00:53
734 0690 MIA 17:13 (02:07) 19:20 CLT
REST:S1
DUTY BLK DH 1/2 MIN 1/3.50 T RIG VMin T PAY
12:05 07:37 00:00 00:00 00:00 0:00 00:00 07:33 07:37

Notice that the VMin totals 15 hours and that the VMin is also less than hard time except day 2, where they are equal.

Jim

 

[usfliboi]

So how does our duty rigs compare to south west?

 

[PITbull]

Yes. I see that U has a couple of trips that have a day that only has 1 leg. But there is not rig payout by the end of trip. The pay still equals 15 hours. The "give" this winter was substantial in that arena and allowed the co. to use us for 1 leg in a day, and work us till we dropped the next, just o end up with the same pay at the end of the trip.

Before the Winter restruc. that trip would have been worth :08 more (15:08) with the 2ond day paying out a variable min day pay to averge 5 hours.

With the Variable min with "no floor; no ceiling", makes it harder to get more time than what is published. Hard to explain this to the "lay person". All I know is that it sucks.

 

[PITbull]

USfliboi,

Both are flying "hard time". Only difference, SW has a better deal. Their average duty day is 10.5 hours....our average duty day is 13, with 15 hours being the max.

If you notice, on all the trips, there is no "rig" payout. It states 0:00, 0:00, 0:00 for USAirways.

So, you may have the illusion that a rig exists, but in reality, your flying hard time, and eating up the rig, even though you are sitting around at airports much of the time. The optimizer in place has the penalty time down to a science so not to pay out. SW planes are in the air about 3 hours on average more than U, so those folks are making more in flight time or segments in a day.

 

[tadjr]

Speaking strictly from a service standpoint (nothing to do with skd/pay/flight time, etc) I think the crews together is a much better concept. I remember a long time ago when they didnt stay together and had several rude awakenings when the F/As said lets board and get the plane boarded only to check things out in the cockpit and find no crew. With all of the happenings before a flight there are many times you dont see the cockpit crew until the end of boarding due to walk arounds, checking things in ops with dispatch and of course eating. Anyway, its much easier to have all or none and know where everyone is coming from at the same time. Just my personal opinion.

 

[BoeingBoy]

usfliboi,

Frankly, I have no idea. Never seen the WN contract, so maybe someone who has will chime in.

The only thing I know for sure is that their pay (at least used to be) is based on the concept of segment or some such name. Comes from their early days of flying only within TX and all the flights being short and relative equal time. Their pay rate was $X per leg instead of per hour. As they've spread out from TX, I understand that the longer flights have resulted in a leg paying multiple "segments". Once saw a comparison that said that what they consider a segment for pay purposes equals about 0.9 hours, but can't vouch for the accuracy of that.

Jim

 

[BoeingBoy]

Pit,

I see what you're saying - I thought they meant "one day of a trip" and you thought "one day trip".

On the subject of the airplanes averaging 10 hours per day, the key is "average" (and assuming that the company is meeting the contractual requirement). The European airplanes fly somewhere between 16 and 20 hours per day (well, Glasgow & Manchester are probably a little less). The Caribbean and west coast planes probably get 11 to 13 hours. That leaves the rest of the planes flying 8 to 9 per day, which results in those short days in the pairings.

Jim

 

[BoeingBoy]

Pit,

Another tidbit that you already know, but for those who talk about the "inefficient" work rules we have (at least us crews)

There is a bidding program (WinBid) that a lot of us use that calculates what we could have worked from the time we report for a trip till we get off duty at the end of the trip. This is compared to what we actually work, and shown on the pairing.

For the pairing I posted above, here is what WinBid had to say:

Pairing 41272 WORKS 63% of the time it could have (legally and contractually)

In other words, considering the FAA regs and the contract, someone flying this pairing could have worked over 50% more than they were scheduled to by the company.

Jim

 

[PITbull]

Boeing,

Is that inefficieny due to our contracts, or the way the route system and a/c utilization is, or both?

I have posed the question to c/s regarding the Penalty time for the rig, and they say the penalty time is down to 3%. It was around 8% in 2002. That's the last time I asked, and that is a significant improvement from the co. perspective.

So, correct me if i'm worng, but this management could implement much of their "plan" without taking from our contracts, and utilize the crews more efficiently.

I do realize that the part of the "fare structure rationalization" implementation will have to translate to labor picking up the difference in order to offer lower and consistant fares, that's obvious in their slide presentation. I don't believe management could get a better price on fuel, as we have to pay upfront; not as we go along. However, the rest could be done asap. Don't you think?

 

[BoeingBoy]

Pit,

The crew that flies this trip could have flown over 21:30 considering both the contract and the FAR's.

The rest of your question (rt system or utilization) is a little more complex. The direct answer is a/c utilization. Look at the european routes where the utilization is high - those crews are getting 8+ hours per duty period. For most of us (and all who fly the 737 since it flys no further than mid-continent) 5 hours average is about the best we can hope for. When you're talking about flying an airplane 10 hours or less per day, for every crew that flys it 7-8 hours causes another crew to fly it no more than 2-3 hours.

The reason for low aircraft utilization (except the long haul birds) is the route structure. Flying in and out of hubs all day kills aircraft utilization. Looking at our average stage length and making a pure guess at the effect of removing the long-haul flying, the result is probably 600-650 miles or about 2 hours. Considering that each stop probably averages close to an hour, each plane sits on the ground 1/3 of each day.

So - it's both. That's why I'm so enamored of the rolling hub concept.

Flying the planes more per day generates additional seat miles at the lowest cost possible - aside from the crew, fuel, and maintenance, everything else is already paid for. On the 737 or little Bus, the CASM for these extra seat miles should be in th 4 to 5 cent range as compared to our average 11.7 cent in the 4th quarter.

The problem as I see it is that the company apparently wants to fly the planes more but use the current crews by changing the pay cap. In other words, expand the flying without expanding the work force. Admittedly this is cheaper since recalling people would include paying benefits (insurance, etc), but we're talking a couple of tenths cent per seat mile at most.

Jim

 

[PITbull]

So Jim, what are you saying? How is that a problem?

When the co. states they will increase a/c utilization, that basically will or will not mean more flight time to the existing personnel? OR, is increase a/c time in the air will benefit the co, but the crews pay and hours will basically remain the same? Won't that increase pilot block hours?

I heard the rumor that our existing pilots will be asked to fly approx 10 hours more a month on a rotating quarterly system (as you guys are capped by FAA for so many hours in a year). I know that will translate in flying more and pay for the pilots, but how will that effect f/as who are on options. There is only 5, 000 of us left. I am not sure how this all comes together, and any insight will help. But explain in simple terms for "small minds" like Piney Bob....no just joking..... LOL...

PS: I think this thread is getting a little "top heavy". The moderators may have to shut it down......

 

[BoeingBoy]

Ok Pit,

To keep it simple, let's throw out the long-haul flying, reserves, and say 200 airplanes fly an extra hour per day and all blockholders fly 85 (ignore the F/A options). That's 200 extra block hours per day or 6000 extra block hours per month that has to be covered. The existing crews can fly more per month to cover it or crewmembers can be recalled to cover it (or actually the senior reserves would move to blockholder and the recallees would be reserves).

I have heard that the company wants to raise the pay cap for pilots, but no details. For the F/A's, if the "me too" doesn't apply they could just offer more 95/105 hour options.

Jim

 

[ktflyhome]

Two things Pitbull: I was recently called by Future Sched. They said they could split me off a trip going in to my days off (inv) it would have been a 3-day trip worth 11 hours only, or I could ROC. I chose to ROC. Not getting my time anyway and why do a 3-day for 11 hours. I Roc'd, they called back with a 2-day worth 11 hours. Duh. Glad I rocked.

Secondly, was told by a good friend, F/A who called the Union office the other day, that our VP told her this. When preferrential bidding starts (presumably) by June now, there will only by 10% trips open to be covered by RSV. Which he indicated would mean only flying sick call, vacation, holidays. Which means, they will probably need even LESS of us. Any comments on this??? <_<

 

[PITbull]

Kt,

Well, on the first note, you did well to ROC.

Second, the winter restrurturing agreement states on page 6 that the 10% open-time requirement in Sec. 9.B.4 will be eliminated.

That means that once Pref bid is in place, there will no longer be a "minimum" of open time on the bid sheet required.

Therefore, if there are fewer sick calls , and co. allows flyback vacation, harder to get medical leaves, or penalized for OJI events, basically you will have even less trips to go into the "bucket" for reserves.

PIT pres. wrote this out in the "winter Dec. 21 newsletter of 2002. Stated, basically, is there a bid sheet left with no MINIMUM requirement.

Not good.

 

[PITbull]

Boeing,

Thanks. I got it. I can now anticipate a little better what they may ask of our group. Personally, I like the idea of buidling more blocks and recalling f/as to reserve. But hat just won't happen. If they ask to open up the options or eliminate 55 hour option which we have the max of 10% of our f/as currently on, that might work for them. However, may not work for our f/as who are moms of little kids.

Personally, I look for least collateral damage. But members must decide whether to participate. And that largely will be based on how management responds going forward with our group. I'd like to see middle mangement change completely. No trust there for sure. Need new folks.

So, we shall see what transpires next.