' Morning all (note to self: must get out more)...
4468
(At the danger of staying off topic, though perhaps relevant as history).
However the back to back restrictions may at least have been partially based in a desire to protect folks from themselves? For example, the back to back to back to back to back merchants. Who have commuting/UK income tax issues.
As you say rightly EASA often makes no sense, the back to backs being a classic example: The "protect folks from themselves", was a popular comment from those who didn't want them/do them (and dare I say it somewhat parent > child in tone) but as somebody else pointed out earlier in the thread some individuals
genuinely found a back to back, even across the pond, easier than cross the pond and back, two days off, then stateside again (I certainly found it easier and mea culpa, even I was guilty of b2b2b'ing suitable trips a few times....it's horses for courses). Back to backs are now an option for roster control that has been reduced to pilots due EASA, so be it. Above all I'd certainly agree with you that I wouldn't want them forced on anyone.
If you want a personal take on this from a commuter I just work around the changes and FWIW whilst the change has made commuting slightly more frequent some months it's not a big deal, as for tax "issues"...? Of course a very large number of those described as "commuters" do live in the UK - Manchester, Glasgow, Edinburgh, etc.
Anyhow, all water under the bridge, perhaps for the sake of prospective DEPs we should move on..
n w
Thanks guys for the replies as to why BA don't do fixed links. It's hard to think that with the sophistication levels of rostering softwares out there it shouldn't be too hard to achieve
I think if you saw the various industrial agreements in play you'd probably have a better handle on why even the most sophisticated software would struggle to produce economical fixed links.