HA - Latest System Bid

[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.