HA - Latest System Bid

[HAL]

Also, from my perspective the issue isn't very much the 5 day international stuff (which is a function of non-daily flight schedules), it's the stupid 3 day lax, or 4 day vegas that, frankly, are inefficient because the company has no incentive to tweak the schedules to make them efficient.

When did it become the pilot's job to tell the airline when to schedule its flights?

Again, this isn't me being in favor of the management's side, but rather dealing with reality. Is the company purposely scheduling the flights like this to mess with the pilot's lifestyles? Or are they scheduling the flights to maximize passenger interest, thereby filling more seats and paying our salaries? If the union can show that a few minutes difference in schedules can increase pilot efficiency, then go for it. But if the company shows that the same schedule change results in decreased loads and less profit, then why are we asking for it?

I've been around this industry long enough to remember when unions asked for the sky, and in some cases got it. In all of those cases the contract was quickly followed by bankruptcy, furloughs, and sometimes liquidation. The common thread in all those negotiations was a lack of reality on both sides. The pilots just wanted more - period - and to heck with the consequences. The airlines thought the good times would never end, and the big bucks would never stop rolling in. Today, the airlines have taken a forced course in fiscal reality. If we don't do the same, we're bringing a boxing glove to a gun fight. We need to be prepared by knowing EXACTLY what is possible, then push for every cent of that. It's called being prepared, informed, and smart. Push for something that isn't possible, no matter how much you want it, and you're setting yourself up for bitter disappointment and a fractured pilot group.

For HA25, yes, other airlines pay a daily minimum on ICN trips. And again I'll ask, what percentage of the total paid pilot time is soft time for those airlines? If it is in line with the rest of the industry, fine. If we can show that our schedules don't have a higher percentage of soft time, we should have it too. If we're at a much higher percentage, we need to find out if an arbitrator might be willing to consider giving it to us. If the answer is yes, again, go for it. If not however, we have to face the reality of it and move on to something we can get. These are the questions an arbitrator WILL ask, and if we haven't prepared ourselves with the answer already, there is no point in asking it in the first place. That is how negotiations work in today's economy.

HAL

 

[Hawaiian 5-0]

HAL, with all due respect, we're just going to have to agree to disagree.

It's not the unions job to tell the airline WHEN to schedule the flights... It's the unions job to tell the company when and what to PAY the pilots. Once we're paid for our hotel days, the new economics will sort out the flight schedules.

If the company wants to send us on 3-5 day trips where we're sitting in hotels, fine. The company can PAY us for those 3-5 days we are sitting in the hotels. Per-diem is not pay, it's expense reimbursement. We need to be paid like everyone else is.

You have been around here for a long time and have my respect for that. Please understand though that many of us newer guys have been around the block at other airlines before coming here. It's not the 9-11 era anymore. the economy has recovered and all of the airlines, including ours, are doing well. This is not my first rodeo either.

This won't go to arbitration, because it's a slam dunk. All of the other major/legacy airlines are getting paid for their days in hotels. We are not. Again, per-diem is not pay. those other guys are getting per-diem AND pay. I think the NMB would flat out release us over the lack of duty rigs... No arbitration needed. Our contract is that deficient.

IMHO, it is not an unreasonable request to actually be paid for a day that you are forced not to be home. Everyone else in our industry, and pretty much every other industry gets paid for days when they are on company assignment. A day sitting in a hotel is a company assignment, thus a work day. It should be paid.

Sir, it's not the 9-11 era anymore. Everyone else is making gains. There is no reason that we cannot make the same gains.

Sir, I am well familiar with the famous United contract that helped the Golden Goose to death... I don't even want to choke the Golden Goose... I just expect the Golden Goose to to be industry competitive with our next contract. Again, our stock price has tripled in the few years I have been here. It's time we got a part of that.

Hey... I'm not saying it's going to be an easy fight. We are going to have to pull out all the stops to make this happen.

Again, you have my complete respect as you are a senior Captain. We are just looking at this differently. I hope I get a trip with you some day and we can discuss this going over the pond. Have a good night.

 

[HA25]

^^^like^^^

Think you are right and I am also starting to think it's going to be quite a fight for those increases.

You're damn right it will. I've got my body armor on, you?

 

[HA25]

I think if you would find that our pilots fly more block hours than any other big player. The union should research the numbers and use them as a tool during negotiations.
The interisland reserrves often fly 50+ hours per month.

the reserve staffing formula (even when it's actually being applied) is a joke here... they rely on overtimers, double time and reserves to fly all the time... It might on balance be cheaper than hiring a few pilots more, but the cost to the stress it brings to both middle managers / schedulers and pilots is unwarranted.... I'm in my 7th day of reserve and I've yet to sit ... 2 back to back international trips, and looking at the open time, I'm sure I've got one waiting for me when I get back.

There is going to be a reckoning when we sit at the table for section 6 to discuss rigs, staffing, minimum guarantee (many of us want to bid below 75).... etc..

btw, our FA's are always running fat... and can bid down to 40 hours a month.. On balance, they've got far better work rules than we do.

 

[HA25]

For HA25, yes, other airlines pay a daily minimum on ICN trips. And again I'll ask, what percentage of the total paid pilot time is soft time for those airlines? If it is in line with the rest of the industry, fine. If we can show that our schedules don't have a higher percentage of soft time, we should have it too. If we're at a much higher percentage, we need to find out if an arbitrator might be willing to consider giving it to us. If the answer is yes, again, go for it. If not however, we have to face the reality of it and move on to something we can get. These are the questions an arbitrator WILL ask, and if we haven't prepared ourselves with the answer already, there is no point in asking it in the first place. That is how negotiations work in today's economy.

HAL

My friend, if you think paying the pilots an additional $1500-$2000 for a LAX or LAS 3 day trip is going to break the bank on the 330 you're wrong. The money made on a round trip with domestic loads of 92% plus not to mention the cargo the 330 carries is stupidly higher than that.. the margins will go down, and the share holders and management will simply have to take smaller bonuses and dividends, that's all. Why is it our place to subsidize their income?? Moreover, the number of days off pilots get here (especially on the junior side) is a complete joke... the worse schedule at DAL on the 330 is 15-16 days off... 20+ on the senior side. Reserve at 12 days off is also a joke... Allegiant like.. Or as one FO calls us "The Mesa of the majors" .. sigh.

I've flown with captains who fly .84 on LAS turns where the additional fuel burn is over $2000 ... nobody says a thing.

And what about those secondary bid lines that Brad O was absolutely in love with?? 60 hours of flying 13-14 days off with 75 hours of pay, clearly the lower productivity isn't a bank breaking hardship..

 

[HA25]

Seniority should buy some things, but that's way too much.
No pilot anywhere on a major airline seniority list should have a sh/t life.
That's the standard.

sorry for the post spam, but had to +1 that comment. Enough raising of the white flag fellas. Whether you paid your dues AT Hawaiian or elsewhere, this INDUSTRY is in a different place today than it was a decade ago, and don't forget .. there's apparently a "pilot shortage".. Supply = Demand.

 

[Microclimates]

When did it become the pilot's job to tell the airline when to schedule its flights?

Again, this isn't me being in favor of the management's side, but rather dealing with reality. Is the company purposely scheduling the flights like this to mess with the pilot's lifestyles? Or are they scheduling the flights to maximize passenger interest, thereby filling more seats and paying our salaries? If the union can show that a few minutes difference in schedules can increase pilot efficiency, then go for it. But if the company shows that the same schedule change results in decreased loads and less profit, then why are we asking for it?

Hey buddy, I meant no disrespect and am trying to qualify my comments with pretty stuff like: "in my opinion", "I think", "maybe"...

I also am very well aware of my position, and job description. I don't expect that I know more about scheduling/planning/marketing than the schedulers/planners/marketers... That said:

1. I think you will agree that in some ways, the view from the pointy end of the plane is clearer, in certain ways, than from any cubicle at Kcorp.
2: HAL50 put things a lot more clearly than I evidently did: it's not a question of telling the airline how how to schedule: it's a question of being compensated for time away from home that is not productive, for anyone. Why should we carry the burden of marketing strategy? our job is to fly the plane. if we are not flying the plane, we should either be at home or compensated for sitting around not being at home.
3. Given that our job is to fly the plane, is not the same as saying that we can't comment, or have opinions, on how other departments are doing their jobs... IN MY OPINION (insert however many qualifiers reduce the level of affront), at HAL, market planning aren't QUITE as sht hot as they think they are, crew scheduling are very nice but B.O. is ALWAYS working the angle (as he should, it's in his job description), so, in the case of inefficient 3 and 4 day west coast trips, IMO they exist because they are cheap for the company.

lastly, as HAL25 says, here we are perfectly willing to nickel and dime ourselves, lest we po management, and yet here we are two engine taxiing, .84ing, absolutely no fuel conservation-ing... meanwhile, no ground power in HNL, ever (while DL everyone else are hooked up, religiously, always), and we roll out this pathetic APU initiative (but only on the mainland).

 

[Dan Roman]

As HAL explained the trips are what they they are, very little can be done about that that I can see. The company currently does try to make them as efficient as possible. Look at SFO, PDX etc. That is because they would rather do them as 2 day.
I say the answer is going to be duty rig as a number one priority on the new contract. While I can hold the efficient trips myself, I have no problem prioritizing an industry standard/leading duty rig. I understand Delta now gets 5.15 hrs min for any day they go to work. That should be our priority first and foremost. It solves a lot of the complaints here.

 

[igneousy2]

In addition to the airline economics, the reality is that pilot pay is a relatively small part of the whole equation. If trip rigs or min/days help for pilots quality of life then go for it and then "stay in your lane"...let the crew planners, fleet managers, etc work it out. Maybe it means heavy crewing more flights...maybe it means opening a LAS base, that's not the pilots job.

I have worked for a small medium and a large airline and it still amazes me that management is able to use the size argument...but what amazes me more is how they can still get at least a few pilots to bite. AA management "we can't pay you what SWA gets because although they are smaller...they have a single fleet type....blah blah blah". Alaska management "we can't pay you what delta 737 pilots get because they have wide bodies to help subsidize the 737 pay rate. There is an argument for/against any possible scenario you can think of.

In my opinion, airline size shouldn't matter, the market rate is the market rate. Would you Captain a 767 for $35/hour just because the airline only has 2 of them? Should an airline have to pay $800 an hour just because they have 300? The market rate is the market rate...there is no reason HA pilots shouldn't be within a stones throw of the largest airlines.

As far as the PBS comment about not letting senior pilots get what
they want, actually all airlines have some parameters (including HA) that can be set to level out the flying. Essentially in a PBS you tell the computer to build a range of lines with a range of hours and a range of days off. How you manipulate those numbers wil change the distribution of the trips. The fact that you are allowed to waive days off to get a line at Hawaiian actually makes the lines for the senior guys better at the expense of the junior guys...at least in terms of days off. If you forced the computer to build the same number of lines with a 12 day off non-waiveable minimum...you would end up with the same number of lines but with the senior guys getting less of what they want and probably less days off. I.e instead of the top 4 guys getting 4 high time SYD...the 4th guy might only get 2 and the more efficient trips get pushed further down the food chain.