Airline Crew Planning

Balancing remuneration and rostering options to achieve effective and attractive airline crew planning.

A hybrid approach to airline crew planning blends flexibility and fixed elements

Amidst crew shortages and labor market challenges, airlines are grappling with crew sourcing issues causing large scale operational disruptions. After COVID travel restrictions, a disbalance has evolved between available crews and aviation’s recovering demand. The factors influencing the lack of supply have been mass early retirement due to COVID. The aging pilot population has caused to a significant pilot shortage. This is expected to increase over the next years. In addition, bottlenecks in training programs are slowing down the efforts to close the gap.

Remuneration and rostering are pivotal in crew management, impacting both, airlines and crew members. This global challenge is increasing the pressure on airlines to become more attractive for crews. Therefore, understanding underlying decision motives is crucial to excel in this environment. In airline crew planning, two prevalent base remuneration models — Block-Hour and Flight Duty Period — pose distinct advantages and drawbacks. An analysis carried out by our operations experts reveals a prevalent preference for the Block-Hour model, possibly due to cost efficiency, but this may strongly vary on a case-by-case basis. Roster models also influence airline attractiveness as employers. Using a hybrid approach which blends flexibility and fixed elements shows promise.

The two main airline crew remuneration models each have their pros and cons

Remuneration and rostering are two of the most relevant areas within airline crew management, playing a major role for the company and crew member. In principle, there are two base remuneration models which are widely adopted by airlines worldwide. The Block-Hour model is based on the number of block-hours flown i.e. from off-blocks to on-blocks. The Flight Duty Period model uses the number of hours since arrival at airport until end of duty period, thus including Preflight duties, flight hours, turnaround and post flight duties. In addition to the base models, further add-ons can be negotiated, e.g. standby time, simulator time or office activities.

The Block Hour model appears to give a more transparent impression of the differences between crew productivity and operational performance. It is also easier to benchmark and compare to most airlines worldwide. However, crews generally have a higher acceptance of the Flight Duty Period model. In their perception it reflects the coverage of the whole duty period.

Our benchmark analysis indicates a higher preference of airlines towards the Block-Hour option. Indeed, the Block-Hour model appeared to be the most cost advantageous option, but this condition may strongly vary from airline to airline. In the vast majority of cases, it demonstrated a cost benefit over the Flight Duty Period approach of 10-30% in half the scenarios.

Tailoring these models to individual airline needs can enhance crew management effectiveness in evolving market dynamics.

The two main airline crew remuneration models each have their pros and cons

Remuneration and rostering are two of the most relevant areas within airline crew management, playing a major role for the company and crew member. In principle, there are two base remuneration models which are widely adopted by airlines worldwide. The Block-Hour model is based on the number of block-hours flown i.e. from off-blocks to on-blocks. The Flight Duty Period model uses the number of hours since arrival at airport until end of duty period, thus including Preflight duties, flight hours, turnaround and post flight duties. In addition to the base models, further add-ons can be negotiated, e.g. standby time, simulator time or office activities.

The Block Hour model appears to give a more transparent impression of the differences between crew productivity and operational performance. It is also easier to benchmark and compare to most airlines worldwide. However, crews generally have a higher acceptance of the Flight Duty Period model. In their perception it reflects the coverage of the whole duty period.

Our benchmark analysis indicates a higher preference of airlines towards the Block-Hour option. Indeed, the Block-Hour model appeared to be the most cost advantageous option, but this condition may strongly vary from airline to airline. In the vast majority of cases, it demonstrated a cost benefit over the Flight Duty Period approach of 10-30% in half the scenarios.

Tailoring these models to individual airline needs can enhance crew management effectiveness in evolving market dynamics.

Two pilots sitting in an aircraft cockpit preparing for take-off

The hybrid roster model promotes employer attractiveness and efficiency

In addition to the remuneration scheme, the roster model has a huge impact on crew productivity and the employer attractiveness of an airline. Crew scheduling can range from full flex rosters to full fixed rosters. The flexible airline crew planning is less predictable for the crews and thus less attractive to employees. A fixed roster allows crews more stable planning and predictable rostering e.g. in the assignment of off-days. However, fixed roster crew planning is only suitable for smaller airlines with short-haul networks.

In operations steering a high degree of flexibility in crew planning can be used in response to schedule disruptions/IRREGs (e.g., flown hours and remuneration) In the fixed model the operations are more predictable and have a higher level of productivity.

The implementation of a hybrid model allows the combination of the benefits of both models, while minimizing constraints. There can be a potential reduction in operational cost led by higher crew productivity if a hybrid model is implemented. The implementation of a hybrid roster model is a feasible solution, as long as certain rules are respected.

 

Friendly crew member serving a customer and offering them food while smiling.

How can we help with our airline and airport consulting services?

Get in touch with our team of experts to discuss how we can help you fulfill your business aspirations.
We look forward to hearing from you.