Slashdot Mirror


American Airlines Accidentally Let Too Many Pilots Take Off The Holidays (npr.org)

A glitch in American Airlines' pilot scheduling system means that thousands of flights during the holiday season currently do not have pilots assigned to fly them. From a report: The shortage was caused by an error in the system pilots use to bid for time off, the Allied Pilots Association told NPR. The union represents the airline's 15,000 pilots. "The airline is a 24/7 op," union spokesman Dennis Tajer told CNBC. "The system went from responsibly scheduling everybody to becoming Santa Claus to everyone." "The computer said, 'Hey ya'll. You want the days off? You got it.'"

32 of 200 comments (clear)

  1. Sounds familiar by amalcolm · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Do they use the same holiday scheduling software as Ryanair?

    --
    Time for bed, said Zebedee - boing
    1. Re:Sounds familiar by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 3, Insightful
      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
  2. Yeah.... by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm gonna need you to go ahead and come in on Christmas. That'd be great.

    1. Re:Yeah.... by JackieBrown · · Score: 2

      I got the memo!

    2. Re:Yeah.... by slipped_bit · · Score: 5, Funny

      They're having trouble with their Transport Pilot Scheduling (TPS) reports.

  3. United drags passengers off the plane by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    American drags pilots on. What a lovely industry!!!

  4. Would a rewrite in Rust help? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Would rewriting this scheduling software in a modern programming language like Rust or Go or Node.js, which make logic and programming errors much harder to introduce, help prevent future incidents?

    1. Re: Would a rewrite in Rust help? by omnichad · · Score: 5, Funny

      That wooshing sound isn't a 747 engine.

    2. Re:Would a rewrite in Rust help? by Sarten-X · · Score: 4, Funny

      I give your troll about a 4/10.

      You have the required unsubstantiated claim and pretty decent bait, but overall it's not very catchy, mostly because it's almost completely detached from the subject of the parent post. It would have been more effective to first steer the conversation towards your bait, such as with a tie-in line like "The legacy airline software often has major bugs that have been left in because they're too hard to find and fix. I have to wonder if..."

      You also cast your net too wide, by targeting three languages with wide dissimilarities. Just "Rust or Go" would have been more effective as a compiled choice, or "Node.js or Python" would target the interpreted languages, but combining the two without addressing the differences weakens your overall presentation.

      Better luck next article.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    3. Re:Would a rewrite in Rust help? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Would rewriting this scheduling software in a modern programming language like Rust or Go or Node.js, which make logic and programming errors much harder to introduce, help prevent future incidents?

      Only if you use Agile and DevOps.

      Of course, then the planes would just fly themselves.

      For free, after being outsourced.

    4. Re:Would a rewrite in Rust help? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      I'm a former software engineer, now airline pilot.

      Trust me, you NEVER want airplanes to fly themselves. Airplanes have no fail-safe mode. Software can ALWAYS fail even in the most advanced HAL9000. Worst case, if sensors that feed the computer fail, or if power fails, you're shit out of luck and everyone dies.

      Even with pilots in control, the software that helps automate routine tasks fails constantly. I've personally prevented at least a dozen tragedies.

    5. Re: Would a rewrite in Rust help? by edtice1559 · · Score: 2

      Now *this* is a great Troll. Maybe we need a +1 Troll mod! I have no opinion on Rust. It seems to be an improvement on C++ although they didn't make the language expressive enough that it could do without a pre-processor. They think that meta programming is a feature (it's not, ever). Given this, I would tend to think that any terribly strong opinions on rust (for or against) would be unwarranted. Maybe I'll get -1 Feeding a troll.

    6. Re: Would a rewrite in Rust help? by petermgreen · · Score: 2

      The potential killer feature of languages like rust is memory safety through compile time proof.

      Java and it's ilk offer memory safety though use of a garbage collector such that stale pointers are not possible but garbage collectors come at a cost in terms of predicability and playing nice with the rest of the system. C++ tries to provide memory safety though reference-counted smart pointers, but reference counting comes at a high cost so most C++ coders use raw pointers and "references" some of the time. In simple code that is ok but add in polymorphism, event handlers etc and it becomes difficult to be 100% sure what pointers will be invalidated by any given call.

      The big downsides of rust seem to be limited platform support, lack of any ABI stability and the general breakneck pace of development.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    7. Re: Would a rewrite in Rust help? by Rakarra · · Score: 2

      The failed Perl scripters hate Rust because they can't comprehend it. The K&R C weenies hate it because it makes them even more obsolete than they already are

      I've never used Rust, honestly don't know much about it, so I don't have an opinion on the language itself.
      You, however, make Rust advocates sound like a bunch of hipster douchebags.
      But Ed Tice is right, the parent is a great way to troll. I'd been disappointed with the obviousness of the trolling recently, the satire was way to obvious.

      A good troll is one who you honestly can't tell is serious or not.

  5. Nightmare before Christmas by ErichTheRed · · Score: 3, Informative

    I work in the airline industry. This is a huge mess for American...it's not like they can just get some temporary holiday help off the street, and airlines have very few pilots sitting around on reserve. Even with the reserve pilots, who are usually the newbies, they have to match up who's qualified to fly certain equipment, keep track of duty hours, maximum flying hours per month. Having a few key flights cancelled due to crew shortages cascades through the whole system...crew and equipment expected to be in certain places doesn't get there in time, so the onward flights in the schedule can't run either. This is where you see things on CNN showing airport terminals with thousands of people milling around with nowhere to go.

    In a seniority-based system. the least senior pilots are probably going to end up getting their vacation cancelled and paid extra to entice them to not say they're unfit to fly. They're also going to have to pick whose turn it is in IT to be the official scapegoat. Airline scheduling is not an easy thing, but the computers doing the schedule rely on human inputs as well.

    1. Re:Nightmare before Christmas by Nidi62 · · Score: 2

      In a seniority-based system. the least senior pilots are probably going to end up getting their vacation cancelled and paid extra to entice them to not say they're unfit to fly. They're also going to have to pick whose turn it is in IT to be the official scapegoat. Airline scheduling is not an easy thing, but the computers doing the schedule rely on human inputs as well.

      It didn't necessarily give them all vacation, it just didn't schedule the line holders to rotations over that time period. Vacation is certainly bid for a whole year period and not given on a month by month basis (barring any vacation moves of course). But you are definitely right that they wouldn't have assigned enough pilots reserve schedules to cover all of those flights (some of whom might have be senior enough to have Christmas off as a reserve pilot but too junior to hold a line and be off on Christmas so intentionally bid reserve). It wouldn't surprise me if that's how this mess was caught: they realized that they had far fewer reserves than there were open trips (because all the trips were open). But this will definitely be costly for AA. With the union squawking about the 150%, AA will probably end up having to pay 200% (which under certain conditions some airlines already pay that much) and might still have to cancel some flights.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
  6. Re: Simple fix..... by 110010001000 · · Score: 2

    You wouldn't quit if you were a pilot. Where would you get a new job?

  7. Re: Simple fix..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Airline pilot economics is a little different than your average IT or development job. You invest years and years in training, and know everything about how the aircraft types you're qualified to operate work. It's also kind of like military experience, in that it's not easily transferrable to jobs outside the industry. Pilots often buy "loss of license" insurance because losing the ability to fly basically means you've flushed all that investment in training and time-in-grade down the toilet. Imagine being an A380 or 777 captain making $250K+ a year flying all over the world, then getting hit by a car or losing your vision.

    So the airline isn't totally powerless in this scenario, but their options aren't good either.

  8. Re: Simple fix..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    It's not getting a job that is the issue, it's keeping your seniority. Pilot jobs are easy to get if you have the necessary hours and ratings. What you cannot do though is retain your seniority. Seniority is how you get the routes you would like to fly. Without seniority you get the routes nobody else will take.

  9. "As much as we're allowed by the contract"??? by Wrath0fb0b · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "We have reserve pilots to help cover flying in December, and we are paying pilots who pick up certain open trips 150 percent of their hourly rate â" as much as we are allowed to pay them per the contract," he told the network

    Hold on a second, the union contract specifies a maximum bonus to the hourly rate that the company can offer? How in the world could that clause benefit either the workers or the company?

    It clearly sucks for the company, because now they've fucked up and should be responsible for paying out however much bonus they need to pay the pilots to entice them to pick up the extra flights.

    It clearly sucks for the workers, because they forego the higher bonus that the company might have paid them. Many of them might have been perfectly willing to reschedule what the computer gave them at 200% or 250% pay.

    Maximum suck would be if the rigidity of the contract prevented them from offering enough, forcing them to cancel flights. That would cost the airlines far more than offering mea-culpa bonus to the pilots and would completely ruin the travel plans of customers.

    Interestingly enough, only 20% of the cost of your flight is salaries. Of that, pilots are probably 5-7% or so (there are many more ground and gate crew per flight than pilots). So even if they had to pay 300% bonuses to get enough pilots to voluntarily do those shifts, that would only be a 10% increase in net costs, bringing their margins for those particular flights from 2.5% to -7.5% (or, making $6 a passenger to losing $10 apiece or so). No matter how you slice it, it's much cheaper for the airline to offer pilot bonuses to compensate for their mistake.

    In a post to its website, the union warned its members that because "management unilaterally created their solution in violation of the contract, neither APA nor the contract can guarantee the promised payment of the premium being offered."

    First off, management asked pilots to volunteer to do those flights in exchange for money. That seems reasonable enough (except of course for the cap on the percentage). Second, I can't imagine that management would promise a premium and then not pay it. That would be an open-and-shut violation of labor law.

    If they really wanted to help, the APA would be organizing the pilots to see how much they would have to be paid to give up the vacation they were promised and then present that to the airline in a package-deal format. Something like "I have 1500 pilots willing to take shifts fro 150% bonus, 2500 for 250% bonus, ..."

    1. Re:"As much as we're allowed by the contract"??? by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "We have reserve pilots to help cover flying in December, and we are paying pilots who pick up certain open trips 150 percent of their hourly rate â" as much as we are allowed to pay them per the contract," he told the network

      Hold on a second, the union contract specifies a maximum bonus to the hourly rate that the company can offer? How in the world could that clause benefit either the workers or the company?

      My guess is the union wants to limit the incentives for pilots flying the maximum hours they are allowed by law in order to get the airlines to hire more pilots. Some statistics I've seen show pilots may fly 900 of the legally allowed hours per month, on average. If the airline could pay enough to get pilots closer to 1000 hours per year they could cut the number of pilots they need. I would hazard it'd take more than a 50% increase to get enough pilots to forgo vacations, etc. since the extra 50% would not make that much of a difference in your annual paycheck for pilots with enough seniority to avoid the less desirable routes the airlines would need to fill.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    2. Re:"As much as we're allowed by the contract"??? by ErichTheRed · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Not every union contract has terms that benefit only one side. Don't forget that pilots make the ultimate judgement call about their fitness to fly. By specifying a maximum bonus, the airline doesn't end up in a bidding war with the pilots, with the pilots as a group staging a sick-out unless they get 10x their pay. So in this very situation, a pilot who was awarded time off but begged to come back could easily say "Sure, I'll do it...for a price." It's a way to limit liability, and even though it makes this tougher to deal with it's a good safety valve. Labor contracts are give-and-take on both sides. For every perk, benefit and favorable work rule the workers get, the company also throws a few things in that go in their favor too.

      People complain about unionized workplaces being inflexible, and it's true that the contract is the contract. But don't forget that every executive in every company has an ironclad employment contract, specifying what perks they get, how much the company has to pay them regardless of performance, etc. Why do you think Marissa Mayer got hundreds of millions for dismantling Yahoo!? I'd definitely work in a unionized environment as opposed to being subject to the whims of HR...at least I could plan my life a little further out than I do these days.

    3. Re:"As much as we're allowed by the contract"??? by Obfuscant · · Score: 2

      Some statistics I've seen show pilots may fly 900 of the legally allowed hours per month, on average.

      A pilot flying 900 hours in a 30-day month is flying 30 hours per day. On average, of course. Some will fly less, some will fly more.

      I'd guess that the monthly limit is more like 240 -- 8 hours, 30 days.

    4. Re:"As much as we're allowed by the contract"??? by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 2

      Opps. Should be per year

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
  10. Re:Simple fix..... by AuMatar · · Score: 2

    They made an agreement, and now they need to back out of it due to their own fault (they bought the crappy software or misconfigured it). Paying the pilot some money to change plans that they made depending on the promise made to them seems reasonable.

    --
    I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
  11. Re:mess by swb · · Score: 2

    Those giant executive salaries? We're told the unicorns who make this money do so because their leadership genius is that good and there's so few of them able to do it.

    And fuck this "we'll cooperate with management" idea. That is the *same* management that would fuck their employees out of a nickel if they could get away with it.

  12. Re: Simple fix..... by ranton · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Imagine being an A380 or 777 captain making $250K+ a year flying all over the world, then getting hit by a car or losing your vision.

    You go on long term sick leave and still make over 6 figures. And the way airlines are hiring right now, any commercial pilot who leaves an airline not due to performance or loss of medical will find a job somewhere else, they will just start over in seniority and pay.

    Long term disability insurance tends to cap out at under six figures, or at least it has at the last three employers I have worked for. While my company's plan covers 60% of salary, that caps out at $90k per year so it doesn't actually reach 60% of my salary. It also doesn't account for bonuses which is a significant part of my total compensation.

    A pilot making $250k a year certainly wouldn't be poor if he became too disabled to be a pilot, but he would probably take a $7500+ reduction to his take home pay each month which is no small thing.

    --
    -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
  13. Re:MsMash Do Be Duh IndoChimp by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

    There is a proper way to say something completely idiotic, like "y'all".

    "Y'all" is a useful word and used daily by millions of people. What is idiotic is a language without a "standard" second person plural pronoun.

    "You" used to be plural, while "thou" was singular. That is why we still write "you are" rather than "you is".

  14. Hey, I'll fly one by roc97007 · · Score: 2

    I'll do it. I've got like 1000 hours in Falcon 4.0.

    Where's the switch for the AMRAAMs?

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  15. Re: Simple fix..... by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 2

    And the way airlines are hiring right now, any commercial pilot who leaves an airline not due to performance or loss of medical will find a job somewhere else, they will just start over in seniority and pay.

    While it's true the Regionals are hiring - So getting a job earning $30K flying from Fargo to North Platte isn't hard - Getting a job at a mainline American "big three" carrier remains extremely competitive and difficult.

  16. Re:MsMash Do Be Duh IndoChimp by Megane · · Score: 3, Funny

    And don't forget the super-plural, "all y'all".

    --
    #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
  17. com by antdude · · Score: 2
    --
    Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).