No comment on ASA PBS LOA yet?

[OCP]

Looks good to me.

 

[LazyLightnin']

I just hope the language is strong enough. For instance.
o Limit placed on the total number of four (4) day trips within a position to sixty-percent (60%).
o Trips will not be constructed to exceed four (4) days without consent of the Association


How about back-to-back 2-days or 2 and 3-days. How many loopholes are in this deal?

 

[centralpilot]

I just hope the language is strong enough. For instance.
oLimit placed on the total number of four (4) day trips within a position to sixty-percent (60%).
oTrips will not be constructed to exceed four (4) days without consent of the Association


How about back-to-back 2-days or 2 and 3-days. How many loopholes are in this deal?

Didn't you read the company e-mail? 4-days are the best solution for the company AND our QOL.

 

[GeekMaster]

I just hope the language is strong enough. For instance.
o Limit placed on the total number of four (4) day trips within a position to sixty-percent (60%).
o Trips will not be constructed to exceed four (4) days without consent of the Association


How about back-to-back 2-days or 2 and 3-days. How many loopholes are in this deal?

You will only get back to back 2 days under 3 conditions:
1. you purposely bid them
2. you are too junior to hold any other combination.
3. you don't bid enough trips to construct a line.

This isn't a deal where the company can build lines with back to back 2 days and claim it meets the contract. You build your own line.

 

[Tarzan]

I'd be happy with 2 days back to back if I had 12 hours at home.

 

[atlcrjdriver]

Looks good so far...
If I like what I hear/see in the road show and the contract language looks good.

Count me as Yes.

 

[Cpt Oveur]

Is anyone else wondering why they (ALPA) so hell bent on pushing this through right now, before February? What do our union officials know that they aren't telling us? PBS provides nothing to the company until the company starts to grow, so why are they saying this. PBS was thought of very poorly by the association until recently, so what is the general pilot group not seeing here?

 

[crj567]

Is anyone else wondering why they (ALPA) so hell bent on pushing this through right now, before February? What do our union officials know that they aren't telling us? PBS provides nothing to the company until the company starts to grow, so why are they saying this. PBS was thought of very poorly by the association until recently, so what is the general pilot group not seeing here?

I would bet the union has heard a "bankruptcy" threat or two.

 

[aeropharoh]

our scheduling section is written to make the company schedule efficeintly. one would think that would be a priority. how about a trip rig say 3.25 to 1. now 3 days look good. hopefully that is in the ta.

 

[crj567]

There is nothing good in the TA....

I cannot believe our union let this stinker get by. There must have been some serious threats (or possibly some sweet gifts) as an incevtive for coming up with an agreement. The only thing I know for sure is: I will not vote in favor of this crappy system-don't try and blame me for all the horrors to come.

Did anyone notice the email from the crew planning jackoff? It took him about 4 pages to say: "f-all you people and your QOL-you work fewer days than we do!"

I guess the company is really on a roll-by this time I am sure we will have dual-qual, probably deadhead pay at 25%, and a health insurance plan with a $50,000 deductable-just to make us "efficient-as-hell."

-Scott and Brad totally must be buying some really nice gifts for some union guys-I have never seen any union become this big a bunch of salespeople lap dogs for every last thing the company wants.

 

[atlcrjdriver]

Is anyone else wondering why they (ALPA) so hell bent on pushing this through right now, before February? What do our union officials know that they aren't telling us? PBS provides nothing to the company until the company starts to grow, so why are they saying this. PBS was thought of very poorly by the association until recently, so what is the general pilot group not seeing here?

Probably b/c the company has wanted PBS for a long tx know and the union knew it. A provision of our current contract was that both sides would make efforts to move fwd w/ or do away w/ PBS. Thus the issue was not going away. The union knows that it would be more benefical to take care of this issue now rather than wait until we officially begin negotiations in a few months.

 

[atlcrjdriver]

There is nothing good in the TA....

I cannot believe our union let this stinker get by.

Can you be more specific? I haven't seen the full TA yet and neither have you unless you are on the ALPA board.

 

[CFIT]

What operating system is being used or the name of the program?

If it's AOS, run don't walk the other way.

The AOS system used at SkyWest is the absolute worse system there is, it was purchased because it was the cheapest one out there.

If you guys vote in a PBS system, and it's AOS, then you union sold you down the river.

 

[atlcrjdriver]

What operating system is being used or the name of the program?

The vendor is Flightline or "FLiCA".

 

[crj567]

I just hope the language is strong enough. For instance.
o Limit placed on the total number of four (4) day trips within a position to sixty-percent (60%).
o Trips will not be constructed to exceed four (4) days without consent of the Association


How about back-to-back 2-days or 2 and 3-days. How many loopholes are in this deal?

100% good points!

-You have imagine all the things which are NOT specially excluded in the agreement. Anything else, the company will absolutely try to get away with.

This whole agreement is nothing more than one major loophole, and a very easy way for SH to slide something into our collective a-hole.

-I'm sure it will pass-we have no shortage of idiots who think SH and BH are on our side. But it will not pass by virtue of MY VOTE-you can bet on that!

 

[atlcrjdriver]

100% good points!

-You have imagine all the things which are NOT specially excluded in the agreement. Anything else, the company will absolutely try to get away with.

This whole agreement is nothing more than one major loophole, and a very easy way for SH to slide something into our collective a-hole.

-I'm sure it will pass-we have no shortage of idiots who think SH and BH are on our side. But it will not pass by virtue of MY VOTE-you can bet on that!

The idiotic thing to do is vote yea or nea on something you have never seen. All we have seen thus far are some of the highlights. If a rep was to ask you why you are voting no right now what would you say? Why don't you wait until the TA is published and come up with some questions to ask your reps. that will address the concerns you have?

 

[LazyLightnin']

You will only get back to back 2 days under 3 conditions:
1. you purposely bid them
2. you are too junior to hold any other combination.
3. you don't bid enough trips to construct a line.

This isn't a deal where the company can build lines with back to back 2 days and claim it meets the contract. You build your own line.

Do you and I build our own lines? Really? Or do we enter our preferences for what we would like and allow the company to build our lines for what ultimately suits them? This is exactly the example of poorly chosen words I am referring to.

 

[IFLYASA]

I have to agree. There are too many loopholes. The company email that was sent out tonight was saying it's more efficient to have 80% 4 days. Now the new PBS language says 60%. Why not 60% now? Exactly! I will not be suckered into this. It's a "NO" vote for me.

 

[atlcrjdriver]

I have to agree. There are too many loopholes. The company email that was sent out tonight was saying it's more efficient to have 80% 4 days. Now the new PBS language says 60%. Why not 60% now? Exactly! I will not be suckered into this. It's a "NO" vote for me.

Per the company right now,
"On average, 80 percent of the trips generated by the pairing tool are four-day trips."

Per the LOA, that is not in place yet,
Limit placed on the total number of four (4) day trips within a position to sixty-percent (60%).

Again, read the language for yourself and if you still don't like it or agree w/ it ask your rep. for clarification.

 

[damnflyboy]

I have to agree. There are too many loopholes. The company email that was sent out tonight was saying it's more efficient to have 80% 4 days. Now the new PBS language says 60%. Why not 60% now? Exactly! I will not be suckered into this. It's a "NO" vote for me.

Yea...the timing of that email was quite fishy.

 

[GeekMaster]

Do you and I build our own lines? Really? Or do we enter our preferences for what we would like and allow the company to build our lines for what ultimately suits them? This is exactly the example of poorly chosen words I am referring to.

With this system, you actually DO build your own line; within the limits of your seniority of course. When you put all of your preferences in, the trips that match that are displayed. Then you select the actual trips you want and drag them onto your bid sheet. You can build as many bid sheets as you want with every trip in the entire bid package in the exact order you want them. It's up to you.

If you don't want to put as much work into the bid, you can list your bid preferences, then list a "few" desirable bid sheet, and finally tell it to use your bid preferences if those aren't available. The software will then build the line based on YOUR bid preferences with the closest available matches at your seniority level.

If you can't hold weekends off, no system is going to give that to you. This system will however give pilots more choices and input on how they want their schedule built than any other PBS system in use. It's a brand new software and it's being customized specifically for ASA.

 

[GeekMaster]

I have to agree. There are too many loopholes. The company email that was sent out tonight was saying it's more efficient to have 80% 4 days. Now the new PBS language says 60%. Why not 60% now? Exactly! I will not be suckered into this. It's a "NO" vote for me.

It's not 60% now because THEY DON'T HAVE TO. They can legally make it 100% 4 days if they want and we have no legal right to complain. 60% is not only a major improvement, it's an industry first. Talk about setting the bar a little higher; this achieves brand new levels.

 

[79%N1]

I have to agree. There are too many loopholes. The company email that was sent out tonight was saying it's more efficient to have 80% 4 days. Now the new PBS language says 60%. Why not 60% now? Exactly! I will not be suckered into this. It's a "NO" vote for me.

Why? I don't get your logic.

You don't like the percentage of 4 days we currently have. This agreement limits those to a much lesser percentage than we have now - which is no limit.

Ergo, you are getting something you want by voting to implement this system. By voting no you are just getting more of the same! Or, is your no vote just punitive to show your displeasure in the current system?

 

[Freebrd]

The AOS system used at SkyWest is the absolute worse system there is, it was purchased because it was the cheapest one out there.

It's Flica, a local (ATL) based system owned by a Delta pilot, and it's being promoted as an improved bidding system. Don't worry though, if ASA pilots vote it in, you SKYW weenies will get it too, thanks to the efforts of a union.

 

[Freebrd]

Yea...the timing of that email was quite fishy.

Maybe but I think the ton of emails mgt got bitching about all the 4 days might be the reason. Mgt told that tool to put something out, and he wrote it his way. We ought to flood their email with more whining about this jerk.

 

[Tarzan]

I have to agree. There are too many loopholes. The company email that was sent out tonight was saying it's more efficient to have 80% 4 days. Now the new PBS language says 60%. Why not 60% now? Exactly! I will not be suckered into this. It's a "NO" vote for me.

Too many loopholes? Have you read the TA yet? WTF is up with you ASA people. A bunch of whining, complaining children who think ALPA can solve everything and that the company is out to screw you over every chance they get because they want to hear you complain. Yeah right. If I could get my way, I'd just have those guys impose this without a vote just to torque off the whiners. Unfortunately, I am just one vote. I like the system and think it will be good for me. I can choose what I want to work and am not bound by the rigidity of the current system. Plus, it will make my company (the place where the paychecks come from) more efficient.

 

[IFLYASA]

Why? I don't get your logic.

You don't like the percentage of 4 days we currently have. This agreement limits those to a much lesser percentage than we have now - which is no limit.

Ergo, you are getting something you want by voting to implement this system. By voting no you are just getting more of the same! Or, is your no vote just punitive to show your displeasure in the current system?

On the CRJ200, there are 337 lines in Jan. 34 lines are Naps, 270 lines are 4-days, 6 lines are 3-days and 27 are back to back 2-days or "other". So roughly 10% are Naps, 80% are 4-days, 2% are 3-days, 8% back to back 2- days or "other".

If 4 days are as efficient as they say, then they will build 60% 4-days PBS per the TA. Using the same numbers as January, of the 337 lines 202 lines will be 4-days. That would reduce 68 4 days trips to be either Naps, 3 days, or back to back 2-days.

Now, the non 4-day lines double from 20% to 40%, I am assumng Nap lines won't change, so that leaves 68 lines to be 3-days or back to back 2- days. For every 3-day, there are 4 back to back 2-days. This will yield 17 3-days and 51 back to back 2-days or "other".

IN SUMMARY, using 60% 4 days instead of 80%, and keeping the number of nap lines the same, January would have yielded 202 4-day trips, 23 3-day trips, 34 Nap lines, and 78 back to back 2 days or "other".

Here is my point, only 23 3-day trips. Even if they converted half the back to back 2-days to 3-days, that would still only be 62 3-days.

Several years ago, I held 3 day trips with weekends off. Unless you are top 10% you will never see that again.

Besides that, I don't like having first come first serve future open time. Unless you live on the computer. Junior pilots will be getting trips that more senior pilots may want. Sure senior pilots are getting most of the open time I want, but that's the way it goes. Being junior comes with a price, and we were all junior at some point in time.

Someone mentioned that having 60% 4-days is a much greater improvement to the 80% 4-days we currently have. Of course it is, why do you think they are currently making 80% 4-days?? So you think you are getting a better deal with PBS!!!!!

Also, why should we extend the contract by 2 years at a 1% pay raise, when we should be negotiating the new contract during this time. That would yield the average 3% pay raise from the end of the current contract. We are losing a 2% pay raise for those 2 years.

I don't buy this garbage.

I vote "NO"!!

 

[crj567]

Consider this as well:

Our current contract mentions a "mix of 2, 3, and 4 days, as well as naps and day lines."

-Has the company complied with this stipulation even once month since the contract was signed? I think not. What about "Red Arrow" days? What happened there?

-We are dealing with people who never try to comply with the language of the contract-and we have union people who (for some reason I cannot understand,) spend all their time and resources trying to explain away all the crappy things the company does and wants to do to us.

-PBS is a crappy deal-
-We cannot afford to give away what is left of our QOL for this crappy deal.

 

[crj567]

Too many loopholes? Have you read the TA yet? WTF is up with you ASA people. A bunch of whining, complaining children who think ALPA can solve everything and that the company is out to screw you over every chance they get because they want to hear you complain. Yeah right. If I could get my way, I'd just have those guys impose this without a vote just to torque off the whiners. Unfortunately, I am just one vote. I like the system and think it will be good for me. I can choose what I want to work and am not bound by the rigidity of the current system. Plus, it will make my company (the place where the paychecks come from) more efficient.

Thank you Scott.

P.S.- I still don't buy one nanosecond of your load of crap in recurrent every year.... I can't believe you think we are so retarded.

 

[IFLYASA]

Too many loopholes? Have you read the TA yet? WTF is up with you ASA people. A bunch of whining, complaining children who think ALPA can solve everything and that the company is out to screw you over every chance they get because they want to hear you complain. Yeah right. If I could get my way, I'd just have those guys impose this without a vote just to torque off the whiners. Unfortunately, I am just one vote. I like the system and think it will be good for me. I can choose what I want to work and am not bound by the rigidity of the current system. Plus, it will make my company (the place where the paychecks come from) more efficient.

Then by all means vote yes. That's why we get the chance to vote. If the new systems works better for you, then I respect your decision.