I find that type of attitude a sad premonition for the future of your merger with XJT

[bigshooter107]

Sorry, I misspelled it and autocorrect changed my misspelling to here say.



Of course! Because they don't know what they don't know. Why should an AirTran pilot care what I want? At least there is a correlation between the CRJ MEC and the ERJ pilots. Also, keep in mind that I'm speaking to the silent majority, not just the 4 or 5 that post.



Honestly, this is not what I'm trying to do. We are getting smartpref for relief line and reserves either way. That's where it is being tested, live and for many months until or if we get a new jcba. My ONLY point is that your MEC is treating you guys like mushrooms. You can't make an informed decision with information. If I wanted to keep our line bidding system, there is a much easier way of trying to do that. And it doesn't involve any CRJ pilot.

Just ask yourselves, why is your MEC silent on this? They haven't even said they are against smartpref. Do you know why?

They voted unanimously against smart pref, they stated as much at the Recall LEC meeting.... They think it sucks.

 

[bigshooter107]

............

 

[FightingIrish]

Sorry, but when a CRJ pilt says that fighting a concession is the wrong move I kind of have to stop reading their post. As well as stop taking them seriously.

Don't take it personal.

Sorry, but we are growing tired of being lectured about concessions from a pilot group that voted not once, but twice for concessions. The ASA pilot group has never voted for concessions. I'm growing tired of the broken record from your side.

 

[FightingIrish]

My ONLY point is that your MEC is treating you guys like mushrooms. You can't make an informed decision with information. If I wanted to keep our line bidding system, there is a much easier way of trying to do that. And it doesn't involve any CRJ pilot.

Just ask yourselves, why is your MEC silent on this? They haven't even said they are against smartpref. Do you know why?

They have explained why smartpref is unacceptable to this pilot group both in a written communication and at the last 112 LEC meeting. Your ONLY point has been debunked several times.

 

[FightingIrish]

Nevets, this is part of a publication that was sent to ASA pilots several months ago. It clearly explains the problem we have with a globalized system.


There has been some misinformation spread that somehow this process is essentially globalization. This idea is factually incorrect. To understand why this is incorrect, we must explain what globalization is.



As you know, PrefBid never looks at a lower seniority pilot’s schedule to complete your schedule. Every pilot is evaluated based on their seniority, only looking to see what trips are unavailable because a senior pilot was already awarded that trip. If you bid for a trip that was not awarded senior to you, is legal for you, and does not conflict with trips for which you’ve assigned a higher preference or your pre-planned activities, it is yours. This is known as seniority-based or sequential awarding.



Global systems are designed to accomplish a specific goal. The goal is specific, pre-determined award parameters. The parameters are usually a combination of open time and reserve staffing. To control the outcome, a global system uses an algorithm to predict problem areas. The senior pilots are awarded what they are requesting. At some point, the system predicts there will be a problem in the total open time, a specific stack of open trips or the number of lines to create. At this point the system starts to manage the problem areas by going further down your list of requests to find a pairing that satisfies the overall solution requirements. Unfortunately, this process is not specifically traceable. In other words, the system cannot provide an audit trail for the pilots affected by globalization. It doesn’t have the ability to list exactly why you did or did not get a trip. It is constantly evaluating the final solution to prohibit problem areas from developing.



In a global system we have reviewed, about 30% of line holders will be under global constraints, every month, at the minimum. Any month there is a schedule change from the mainline partner, a holiday in the month, or a staffing constraint, this level of global constraints will move higher. It can move to the highest levels of seniority depending on the confluence of factors.



Unfortunately, global systems can have other impacts on a pilot’s quality of life. One of the reasons PrefBid was selected was its ability to honor seniority, but also to provide our pilots the same benefit we had in line bidding when a week of vacation would conflict with two trips. Even the junior pilot, who has fewer weeks of vacation to begin with, is able to protect his vacation. A global system is not limited in how far it can go to solve the final solution. If it has to place trips immediately before and after your vacation to solve a parameter, it will. Tighter constraints in open time or staffing require more adverse impacts on a greater number of pilots.

 

[Whydoitry]

Sorry, but we are growing tired of being lectured about concessions from a pilot group that voted not once, but twice for concessions. The ASA pilot group has never voted for concessions. I'm growing tired of the broken record from your side.

We voted twice for concessions, can you elaborate on that? I only recall one.

 

[dojetdriver]

Sorry, but we are growing tired of being lectured about concessions from a pilot group that voted not once, but twice for concessions. The ASA pilot group has never voted for concessions. I'm growing tired of the broken record from your side.

I voted NO, BOTH times. That's OK, the broken record grows tiresome from your side as well. Listening to some of the CRJ guys that drink the kool iad are afraid for their jobs, and think the ERJ side needs to "get on board" are funny to read. For specific details of the two votes, see below.......

We voted twice for concessions, can you elaborate on that? I only recall one.

Version 1 of LOA 9 came out, and was voted on. Then later a small technical detail in the TA wording was discovered and fixed, causing a revote.

It was the SAME LOA, just with a small detail changed that in the end really didin't matter, but would have benefitted the pilot ground had certain scenarios played out IIRC. So it counts as two votes, although it really didn't matter much in the end. Even if the guy above wants to count it as voting for concessions twice.

 

[Whydoitry]

Well, the reason we voted the second time was because ALPA was afraid it was possibly going to fail the first time, but technically there was only one vote not two, so no it can't be counted. And really who the f cares? The only reason that it passed was because a bunch of us ( I voted Yes) were like these ASA cool aid drinkers and believed our ALPA reps and our mgt. So yea, we voted for concessions once, and that will be the last time. NEVER AGAIN!

 

[JustaNumber]

Sorry, but when a CRJ pilt says that fighting a concession is the wrong move I kind of have to stop reading their post. As well as stop taking them seriously.

Don't take it personal.

Agreed, not personal. But since this can of worms is open, can we discuss this rationally (without others calling names)?

Right now, the vast majority of airlines, both major and regional, are using PBS because it saves their company money. Airlines that don't use it are at a financial disadvantage. Fact: regionals are competing with one another for a rapidly dwindling amount of flying. Question: do we want our company to have a competitive advantage or disadvantage? I agree that one has to draw some lines in the sand, but is this the hill you want to die on?

I won't agree to a pay cut just to help the company out. But on the other hand, I believe it was the right thing to do to agree to PBS, as it is the way of the future for airline scheduling, and we can either get with the program now, or later after we've lost half our contracts.

I also respect others' opinions, and I also respect them enough to read to the end of their posts. How else can you exchange ideas if you don't take each other seriously?

 

[Nevets]

Nevets, this is part of a publication that was sent to ASA pilots several months ago. It clearly explains the problem we have with a globalized system.


There has been some misinformation spread that somehow this process is essentially globalization. This idea is factually incorrect. To understand why this is incorrect, we must explain what globalization is.



As you know, PrefBid never looks at a lower seniority pilot’s schedule to complete your schedule. Every pilot is evaluated based on their seniority, only looking to see what trips are unavailable because a senior pilot was already awarded that trip. If you bid for a trip that was not awarded senior to you, is legal for you, and does not conflict with trips for which you’ve assigned a higher preference or your pre-planned activities, it is yours. This is known as seniority-based or sequential awarding.



Global systems are designed to accomplish a specific goal. The goal is specific, pre-determined award parameters. The parameters are usually a combination of open time and reserve staffing. To control the outcome, a global system uses an algorithm to predict problem areas. The senior pilots are awarded what they are requesting. At some point, the system predicts there will be a problem in the total open time, a specific stack of open trips or the number of lines to create. At this point the system starts to manage the problem areas by going further down your list of requests to find a pairing that satisfies the overall solution requirements. Unfortunately, this process is not specifically traceable. In other words, the system cannot provide an audit trail for the pilots affected by globalization. It doesn’t have the ability to list exactly why you did or did not get a trip. It is constantly evaluating the final solution to prohibit problem areas from developing.



In a global system we have reviewed, about 30% of line holders will be under global constraints, every month, at the minimum. Any month there is a schedule change from the mainline partner, a holiday in the month, or a staffing constraint, this level of global constraints will move higher. It can move to the highest levels of seniority depending on the confluence of factors.



Unfortunately, global systems can have other impacts on a pilot’s quality of life. One of the reasons PrefBid was selected was its ability to honor seniority, but also to provide our pilots the same benefit we had in line bidding when a week of vacation would conflict with two trips. Even the junior pilot, who has fewer weeks of vacation to begin with, is able to protect his vacation. A global system is not limited in how far it can go to solve the final solution. If it has to place trips immediately before and after your vacation to solve a parameter, it will. Tighter constraints in open time or staffing require more adverse impacts on a greater number of pilots.

This is an explanation of prefbid flightline and how it's not globalized and why globalization is bad. Where is the communication about all the vast research on smartpref, their analysis, good and bad features, opinions, etc? In fact, this communication further proves that your MEC is unreasonable. They are so obsessed with globalization that they put out an entire book of why its bad. They see the word globalization and don't even give smartpref an honest hard look. They won't look at anything other than prefbid and instead put their fingers in their ears whenever someone mentions any other bidding system. It's all about work rules, right? Not the PBS software itself. That's what you guys say isn't it? Well there are work rules that can be put in place to counteract globalization of that's what you want to do. But I'm sure there will be an excuse on why that won't work either.

Look, most people over on this side are against any pbs. I dont think it would maintain our qol unless we get good work rules. My point: let's get the facts and opinions out and make an informed decision. Let the chips fall where they may, sort of speak. My point: your MEC is trying to stifle that and keep you in the dark. They are trying to control and dictate debate. You should be clamoring for information, not being patriarchal and circling the wagons. You should ask yourselves why!