I appreciate your point regarding trip efficiency with regard to AM/PM pairings. I like the idea of staying in the same circadian flow.
Have you really thought about the amount of time lost commuting in the day before, or commuting home the day after ? Thats not an efficient dollars earned/time ratio. It's a false economy for all commuters.
Time spent at work starts when you leave your house. That's why living in base is the best of all worlds (if you want to live there). SWA pilots who commute to AM/PM lines spend more time at work than those who can commute on the day of their trips beginning and end. That's not an efficiency. It's designed around living in base and driven by the old IT system.
Do you really know how many commute ? Most airlines have 65 - 70% commuters, yet the SWA system is designed for people who live in base. Supported by the senior live in base and the 'Luke i love the dry heat mafia' perhaps ?
A smart scheduling system can have the best of both worlds ..... Almost.
According to the union, who keeps track of such things, SWAPA's pilots are almost exactly a 50/50 split of those who commute versus drive to work. I suppose having a larger number of bases spread throughout the country contributes to having more people drive to one of the domiciles.
A "smart scheduling system" can only accomplish things to the limit of the flying scheduled by the company. The sheer number of flights that depart early or land late at large SWA stations (all our bases) require that
someone fly them at times that are clearly "non-commutable." That's just the way it works with our system--efficient and long use of the aircraft every flying day. As you guys point out, flying is "drying up" on that side of the partition, and you can afford to build more such pairings as Ty likes to fly. However, it won't work on our side; it's too inefficient for our system.
By virtue of our AM/PM and no redeye system, all SWA pairings (or I'll say 99%) are commutable on one end or the other, except, perhaps, by people with six-hour, cross-country commutes. (A few people have extra long commutes by choice, but most are for juniority reasons.) You can typically commute in in the morning of the first day of a PM, or commute home on the last day of an AM.
However, despite not doing redeyes, there ARE a few pairings (very few) that are commutable on both ends, and with a "normal" Southwest density. They are called PM-turned-AM pairings, and you see them occasionally. They typically require one, if not both, overnights to be in the 10ish hour range to accomplish this, and they almost always include a Friday and/or Saturday night (due to Saturday flying's late start and early finish). Perhaps they're designed with commuters in mind, but there can only be so many of them due to the way they're constructed, and personally, I suspect you'll see even fewer of them with the new crew rest rules in January. The company's going to have to give themselves more "wiggle room" on crew rest to account for irregular ops, and the new absolutes that cannot be exceeded.
Regardless, even if the company could create more pairings than they do with easy commute features, that doesn't guarantee that they'll go to commuters. Pairings that start late and/or finish early are probably just as desirable to pilots living in domicile. Plus, a lot of people hate those PM-turned-AMs, even commuters. I'm a commuter, and I won't fly them if possible (on the other hand, maybe I'm just old). Three full days of Southwest flying (and two of those three with commutes attached), with very little rest in between, is exhausting and leaves you tired for days afterward when you're home enjoying yourself. I suppose a personal definition of "quality of life" comes into play here.
Anyway, I hope that explains some of what you were wondering about. There is a union committee who works with the company to create the best pairings possible, and I think that as a whole, they do a pretty good job. You do see a few late-finishing AMs and early-starting PMs, but they work to minimize that. The bottom line is we have to be this efficient to get paid this well (otherwise the company would need more pilots for the same amount of flying). While new ideas are certainly welcomed, and if you AirTran guys have suggestions for the scheduling committee, please bring them on. If we can make our lives better, we're all for it, no matter where the ideas come from. However, thus far we've found it impossible to schedule trips the way you guys like them, and still get paid the way our guys like it. I think that's what we're seeing here.
Bubba
