MarkMyWords
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2002
- Messages
- 1,900
- Reaction score
- 1
We recently announced the April schedule adjustments for Tuesdays and Wednesdays and a big part of me thinks that this was a huge knee jerk reaction that wasn''t completely thoughtout. Operationally it is extremely difficult to just wipe away 2 banks of flights in PIT and 1 in CLT without causing a ripple effect througout the system. At minimum you would have crews and airplanes out of position all over the system. This could cause huge problems for crew scheduling as well as maintenance. Suddenly there will be airplanes out of position throughout the system and shorter operating days to recover maintenance routings. This will provide for longer aircraft down times in maintenance stations once they get there, which could be looked at as a positive.
The crew issue will be something totally different. With the April blocks already awarded any reductions or changes to trip pairings will result in pay guarantees for block holders. Reserve crews will be needed to fill in where there are gaps due to crews being out of position, thus depleeting our reserve crews. Since block holders are pay guaranteed, they will not have to pick up additional hours at the end of the month, so we could find ourselves critical on crew availability.
We also run into a problem at the station level too. The work schedules have already been bid and awarded and there is not enough time to re-bid the work schedule. In a station such as Pittsburgh, how do you staff for normal operations on Sun, Mon, Thurs and Fri, and reduced operations on Tues, Wed and Sat? So now you will have agents sitting around from 6p-10/10:30p doing nothing and getting paid for it. Isn''t this a huge decrease in productivity?
My question is, Couldn''t we have tried to handle this situation in a different way? One of the first things that I thought of was to offer additional e-saver type fares for those days. Where a typical e-saver fare has customers traveling out on Sat and returning on Tues or Wed, why not do things a little differently. Why not have Keep America Flying Fares? Offer E-saver type fares on all three days. Allow customers to travel Sat and return Tues/Wed or Sat. Allow them to start travel on Tues and back Wed, Sat or Tues, etc. Offer the fares as we do e-savers but not just in non-stop markets. If we know that there is an abundance of seats out of ORD to PIT and PIT to LGA/ALB/ROC and ORF, then allow the opportunity to for customers to go from ORD to LGA/ALB/ROC and ORF via PIT. Since these fares would only be made available 2-3 days in advance then it should not have a negative effect on future date bookings.
Since many of our DM partners (hotels and rental cars) are probably having similar problems due to the recent travel slump, then they could also offer similar deals through our e-mail type promotions.
Rather then disrupt the entire airline and reduce employee productivity, why not try to market our way through the rough spot and put some revenue in the seats and keep the schedule intact. If we feel the problem will linger on into May then do a schedule change for May PRIOR to crew blocks being awarded and allow stations to try and creatively rework their agent schedules to optimise the employees they have. In the long run, this schedule adjustment could end up costing us more then if we left the schedule intact.
Anyone else hae any ideas on how we could have possibly handled this situation any differently?
The crew issue will be something totally different. With the April blocks already awarded any reductions or changes to trip pairings will result in pay guarantees for block holders. Reserve crews will be needed to fill in where there are gaps due to crews being out of position, thus depleeting our reserve crews. Since block holders are pay guaranteed, they will not have to pick up additional hours at the end of the month, so we could find ourselves critical on crew availability.
We also run into a problem at the station level too. The work schedules have already been bid and awarded and there is not enough time to re-bid the work schedule. In a station such as Pittsburgh, how do you staff for normal operations on Sun, Mon, Thurs and Fri, and reduced operations on Tues, Wed and Sat? So now you will have agents sitting around from 6p-10/10:30p doing nothing and getting paid for it. Isn''t this a huge decrease in productivity?
My question is, Couldn''t we have tried to handle this situation in a different way? One of the first things that I thought of was to offer additional e-saver type fares for those days. Where a typical e-saver fare has customers traveling out on Sat and returning on Tues or Wed, why not do things a little differently. Why not have Keep America Flying Fares? Offer E-saver type fares on all three days. Allow customers to travel Sat and return Tues/Wed or Sat. Allow them to start travel on Tues and back Wed, Sat or Tues, etc. Offer the fares as we do e-savers but not just in non-stop markets. If we know that there is an abundance of seats out of ORD to PIT and PIT to LGA/ALB/ROC and ORF, then allow the opportunity to for customers to go from ORD to LGA/ALB/ROC and ORF via PIT. Since these fares would only be made available 2-3 days in advance then it should not have a negative effect on future date bookings.
Since many of our DM partners (hotels and rental cars) are probably having similar problems due to the recent travel slump, then they could also offer similar deals through our e-mail type promotions.
Rather then disrupt the entire airline and reduce employee productivity, why not try to market our way through the rough spot and put some revenue in the seats and keep the schedule intact. If we feel the problem will linger on into May then do a schedule change for May PRIOR to crew blocks being awarded and allow stations to try and creatively rework their agent schedules to optimise the employees they have. In the long run, this schedule adjustment could end up costing us more then if we left the schedule intact.
Anyone else hae any ideas on how we could have possibly handled this situation any differently?