Author
Listed:
- Wen, Xin
- Ma, Hoi-Lam
- Li, Yantong
- He, Yonghuan
Abstract
Recognizing the importance of team spirit for cabin crew, airlines used to schedule cabin crew members in teams. In recent years, airlines have operated with increasingly diversified types of aircraft with heterogeneous manpower demands. Thus, many airlines have started to adopt the individual approach to construct itineraries for each cabin crew member to better characterize manpower demand heterogeneity. Due to improved flexibility, the individual approach can better utilize crews to enhance cost efficiency, but it may lead to reduced team spirit. To mitigate the drawbacks of the individual approach, we introduce the concept of pairing similarity (both flight-based similarity and duty-based similarity), which represents the scenarios that crew members work together on the same flights or duties. Based on the new concepts, we propose a novel individual crew pairing model that aims to promote the development of pairing similarity. A column generation-based algorithm is constructed to efficiently solve the model. Computational results demonstrate that our proposed model is able to improve team-building opportunities when the individual approach is adopted. However, this benefit is accompanied by an increased operations cost. Our experiments suggest that there exists a range in which the team-building opportunities are improved with a relatively small increase in operations costs. Thus, airlines are suggested to carefully determine the team-building enhancement level while enjoying the cost efficiency of the individual approach. Besides, through a comparative analysis of the two pairing similarity measures, it is found that the duty-based similarity measure shows a stronger ability to improve team spirit.
Suggested Citation
Wen, Xin & Ma, Hoi-Lam & Li, Yantong & He, Yonghuan, 2025.
"Do costs and team-building conflict in airline crew scheduling? An individual crew pairing approach,"
Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).
Handle:
RePEc:eee:transe:v:202:y:2025:i:c:s1366554525003709
DOI: 10.1016/j.tre.2025.104329
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to
for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:transe:v:202:y:2025:i:c:s1366554525003709. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/600244/description#description .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.