Bidding systems compared: preferential bidding, seniority lines, requests and the lottery, from crew who have used each
-
#1 SAS, and every airline has a different way of turning crew preferences into a roster, and crew who move between airlines are shocked by the difference. Here is a comparison from the systems I have used or watched closely. Correct me for yours.
Preferential bidding (PBS), the US and some legacy carriers
You enter preferences (trips, days off, routes, sign on times) with weights, and the software builds a line for everyone in seniority order, honouring the most preferences it can for the most senior first. Senior crew get almost exactly what they asked for. Junior crew get what is left after the software has built everyone else's. Transparent, brutal, and the reason the US crew talk about their number.
Seniority line bidding, the older US system and some others
The airline publishes a set of complete lines for the month. You rank them. The most senior crew member gets their first choice, the next gets their first choice among what is left, and so on. Simpler than PBS. Less flexible. Still used at some carriers and for some fleets.
Requests, the European low cost and most Gulf model
You submit a small number of requests (days off, a specific trip, a sign on window) by a deadline. The rostering department or the software honours some of them, with priority rules that may or may not involve seniority, and builds the rest of the roster around operational need. Crew describe it as a lottery with a small influence. The Wizz and easyJet and Emirates crew on this forum have all described versions of it.
Fixed patterns, some short haul operations
A repeating pattern (five on, three off, or similar) with the duties assigned within it. Predictable days off, unpredictable duties. Common at some regional and low cost carriers. Crew love the predictability and hate the lack of choice.
The Scandinavian model, which is a hybrid
A collective agreement that sets the pattern limits, a request system within them, and a fairness rule that rotates the good and bad trips over the year so that seniority matters less. The senior crew find it unfair. The junior crew find it fair. That is the point of it.
What each system rewards
PBS rewards seniority and understanding the software. Line bidding rewards seniority and speed. Requests reward modest asks and good relations with crewing. Fixed patterns reward people who want a life outside the job. The Scandinavian hybrid rewards patience.
For applicants
Ask which system the airline uses. It shapes your first three years more than the pay. A PBS airline will give you nothing for three years and everything after ten. A request airline will give you something every month and never everything. Choose the shape you can live with.
-
#2 Delta, PBS, and 'nothing for three years and everything after ten' is the US system in eleven words. I am in the nothing years. The everything years are real. I have flown with people in them.
-
#3 easyJet, requests, and 'something every month and never everything' is exactly it. Three modest requests, one or two honoured, and a roster that is fine. Never brilliant. Never a disaster. The lottery with a small influence.
-
#4 Emirates, requests with some seniority weighting for the good trips, and Ingrid's description of the Gulf model is right. The senior crew get the Sydney 48s more often. Not always. The request system keeps a little hope alive for everyone.
-
#6 Lufthansa, a seniority bid within the agreement's limits, so a European PBS with union rules around it, and yes, year four gets year four's Chicago. The German system rewards patience and the agreement. Same as Scandinavia with more paperwork.
-
#7 Loganair, fixed pattern, and the predictable days off are the reason half the base has children and dogs. We know when we are off in March. The Emirates crew cannot imagine that. We cannot imagine Sydney. Fair trade.
