Splert
PoipuBayResort15thTBox
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2001
- Posts
- 1,188
I am at home now with the fam, so I will only respond to a few posts, and only those that I don't consider harassing senseless BS.
Mathematically, changing the way we bid, and doubling the premium slot allocation will each on its own have about the SAME effect. Each will push the premium slots about an additional 5% of bidding seniority individually.
If you do both at the same time, you might get those slots down to the 20th percentile. Each on its own will get premium slots down to the 10th percentile.
So, even if you do BOTH remedies, you still need to be in the top 20% to get the premium weeks. But we will ALL suffer low bid divisors for 2/3 of the year and a slower growth rate by increasing allocation (not so with changing the bidding method).
Those peak premium weeks are THE LIMITING STAFFING FACTOR. If you increase staffing for those weeks, those pilots need to be carried all year, and we will ALL suffer the consequences of that.
Just in JFK A320 CA seat the company is about 100 weekly slots short of PSIA per month in June, July, August, November and December.
That is 500 slots for 400 or so pilots.
The management straw man argument, which was released about 36 hours after the PVC released its comprehensive study of vacation, is just scare tactic.
A simple work rule applied by other pilot groups would level manning in the off peak months by assigning vacation in those periods.
Vacation is not a bidding problem alone. It is bidding, allocation, distribution and PTV separate from PTS and bank.
The idea that management's only reason for not fixing vacation is that it would harm the pilot group is just nonsense and baseless scare tactic. Vacation is a monumental problem for Jetblue - read $$,$$$,$$$ each year and the gap will grow as 3 year pilots become 5 year pilots and 14 year pilots become 16 year and PSIA allocation gap grows.
Last edited: