An interesting take on "quitting"

FlyPurdue

Well-Known Member
I agree that the prospect of commuting is a huge benefit to the job, and I would never suggest that commuting be abolished. Rather, my problem with it in its current form is that it enables employers to make network optimization decisions (good) with little regard to employees (bad).
 
I think I would rather see contracts negotiated to include commuter provisions similar to what Endeavor enjoys. Have to give yourself 2 flights (like most airlines). But if you can’t make the first one because it’s full or cancels etc the company will positive space you on the second flight if at all possible. That seems like a pretty good perk for pilots choosing to commute. The question becomes is it worth spending negotiating capital on something like that?
 

BigZ

Well-Known Member
I think I would rather see contracts negotiated to include commuter provisions similar to what Endeavor enjoys. Have to give yourself 2 flights (like most airlines). But if you can’t make the first one because it’s full or cancels etc the company will positive space you on the second flight if at all possible. That seems like a pretty good perk for pilots choosing to commute. The question becomes is it worth spending negotiating capital on something like that?
As I'm headed to the airport to finish off a standby shift, I know exactly what I'd spend the negotiating capital on...
 
Commuting is actually a perk. You have the ability to live wherever you want. I know several engineers that I went to school with in Colorado that HAD to move to places like Texas for their jobs.
Yup. Even if you’re one of those people that just can’t handle it (which I get it), you can take your time and move when it’s convenient to you.
 
I think I would rather see contracts negotiated to include commuter provisions similar to what Endeavor enjoys. Have to give yourself 2 flights (like most airlines). But if you can’t make the first one because it’s full or cancels etc the company will positive space you on the second flight if at all possible. That seems like a pretty good perk for pilots choosing to commute. The question becomes is it worth spending negotiating capital on something like that?
At ASA we got a pretty solid commuter clause with our PBS LOA. Took literally all the stress out of commuting to work. As long as you followed the rules and were reasonable, you knew you weren’t going to get in trouble. Commuting home was the only stressful part.

There were actually times where I’d show up and hope like hell that I wouldn’t make it on.
 

L-16B

Well-Known Member
I really think that we as professional pilots, need to push for true 'Home Basing.' I hear the settlement a lot that we chose to commute, but as someone above posted - it is just not practical to be moving constantly. At nearly all of the regionals (some majors/LCCs too), there is just no stick/carrot large enough from management's perspective to stop with the constant displacements, and base shuffling.

Pilots at all levels need to be treated like management consultants...send us where you need us, and we can live (for the most part) anywhere (while respecting seniority from a schedule perspective). Can you imagine if recent hires at Bain, or McKinsey, etc were told..."you need to standby to your work assignment in San Francisco, oh and once you get there...no more SPG...rather you are going to have to pay to live with 20 other people in a small house/apartment." No one would do it.

Its not my problem (anymore) how much this costs, this should be the cost of doing business with professional aviators.
NO NO NO
 

L-16B

Well-Known Member
heee hawww, heeee hawwww, HEEEEE HAAAWWWWWW
At AA we have home/ outstation basing for flight attendants and to a limited degree pilots. If you’re sick you can’t just call in sick, you have to find a replacement as there is no reserves. The company dangles the carrot in front of you to the point where you’re afraid to call in sick. It’s not a good setup.
 

elmetal

Ain't nobody got time for that
At AA we have home/ outstation basing for flight attendants and to a limited degree pilots. If you’re sick you can’t just call in sick, you have to find a replacement as there is no reserves. The company dangles the carrot in front of you to the point where you’re afraid to call in sick. It’s not a good setup.
holy mother that is terrible.
 

bimmerphile

SuperCritical™ Member
At AA we have home/ outstation basing for flight attendants and to a limited degree pilots. If you’re sick you can’t just call in sick, you have to find a replacement as there is no reserves. The company dangles the carrot in front of you to the point where you’re afraid to call in sick. It’s not a good setup.
wut...
 
At AA we have home/ outstation basing for flight attendants and to a limited degree pilots. If you’re sick you can’t just call in sick, you have to find a replacement as there is no reserves. The company dangles the carrot in front of you to the point where you’re afraid to call in sick. It’s not a good setup.
Yea that sounds horrible, but what pilot group would agree to that? I’m all for “home basing”. Set it up like the ACMI boys do it. Build rotations out of any base and DH me to meet the plane.
 

FlyPurdue

Well-Known Member
This is exactly what I want, and still honor seniority, meaning if you live in ATL, you could bid for trips thats start/end in ATL. I actually see this as a way to add efficiency to the hub/base structure too, as airlines would be less tied to the near flat amount of crewmebers at each base annually, and be able to flex more or less crew members to a particular hub mirroring that hubs specific seasonality.

At the end of the day, I am not trying to step on anyones toes with this opinion, and I recognize that many pilots might feel that this is a major concession / or detrimental to QOL...I can understand that. I come from a background in optimization, and am trying to look at aspects of this profession that seem inefficient, and could benefit from a fresh perspective.
 

L-16B

Well-Known Member
Yea that sounds horrible, but what pilot group would agree to that? I’m all for “home basing”. Set it up like the ACMI boys do it. Build rotations out of any base and DH me to meet the plane.
I don’t know what or who ACMI is, but for us / 121 carriers the company isn’t gonna want to staff the outstation with reserves. That’s the big issue. Then they threaten to close it down if flights aren’t getting covered by fellow crew members. Reserves = more money out of company’s pocket.
 

SFCC/UND

Well-Known Member
I don’t know what or who ACMI is, but for us / 121 carriers the company isn’t gonna want to staff the outstation with reserves. That’s the big issue. Then they threaten to close it down if flights aren’t getting covered by fellow crew members. Reserves = more money out of company’s pocket.
Most ACMI are 121 carriers. ATI and K4 use true home basing, while Atlas uses gateway airports.
 

broncoav8r

Well-Known Member
Yea that sounds horrible, but what pilot group would agree to that? I’m all for “home basing”. Set it up like the ACMI boys do it. Build rotations out of any base and DH me to meet the plane.
It works for the ACMI and Sup 121 world for a reason. Small pilot groups with drastically shifting and/or on demand flying.

In the passenger (and brown/purple) 121 world, it wouldn't work quite the same way. Reserves as @SFCC/UND mentioned is one issue. Sure you could solve it by just deadheading you out to sit in X or Y city in a hotel for 6 days, but IIRC some regionals have done that with a "TDY" and guys hated it.

Also, building a legal schedule is impossible if you don't know what the credit/block is on your transportation to/from your start point, and before anyone says it's just a computer, that problem is exponentially more complicated than you realize. To build a schedule algorithms require set piece sizes (in this case credit values) to function. If you think PBS is complete trickery now, Imagine when a highly sought after trip goes to a junior pilot because they are the only ones that have the 30 minute deadhead to and from the start of the trip to make it legal. On the same note Imagine being junior assigned into a trip over Christmas/major anniversary/start of hunting season because you are the only pilot who can make the trip work transportation wise. (Good thing its fall and Home Depot usually has sales on torches and pitchforks)

Take that the other direction and say "ok I'll take positive space travel and hotels, but no credit". EVEN WORSE IDEA. To use a simplistic example. Pilot only commutes once for an 11 day trip. Lets say it's a 2 hour flight each way. Thats 4 hours of credit (credit, that number that counts towards your days off) that you lose each month. While the credit per day at each carrier varies, 5 seems to be an average compromise. so based on that alone thats 9....NINE potential days off throughout the year that you have lost. If you fly straight domestic and commute multiple times, the problem only gets worse.

While I do sympathize with pilots who have crazy stressful commutes, forcing everyone to a home basing would be a drastic hit on QOL for everyone. While the movement on commuter clauses has been a welcome change, others will just have to take responsibility for the "I live in XXX city that has extremely limited service/complicating factors" and that was exactly that. Their choice.
 
Top