Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

ASA PBS Passes

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Register   Log in
Wow! I guess I got put in my place by the flame baiter.

Okay, how in the hell do we get language like that if we don't agree to work together on an issue. You think the company will just give up complete control? There is another safety valve there that includes arbitration. Get over yourself.
 
Spineless sheep, I can't wait for the responses when the 2x4 against the head realization sets in. I think you guys should go for broke and in the next contract give the company dual qual, no 401k match and a ten percent pay cut or whatever it takes to make us the most competitive regional out there.
 
crj567 said:
Yeah-

If you think any "mutual agreement on bid runs" which actually results in a coin toss deciding the issue is going to be good, you need to go play in traffic.

-This is the silliest solution to any disagreement I have ever seen-and it is in the agreement. Tossing freaking coins!!! No kidding!

(How many other groups have this: Answer is NONE-Because it its completely silly and solves absolutely nothing!!)
Click to expand...

Coin toss is only after sever attempts at an agreement and finally not coming to one. And the coin toss is only to see who goes first at eliminating solutions. It doesn't decide anything. What is more of a fate driven 50/50 chance? Has worked for centuries.
 
OCP said:
Coin toss is only after sever attempts at an agreement and finally not coming to one. And the coin toss is only to see who goes first at eliminating solutions. It doesn't decide anything. What is more of a fate driven 50/50 chance? Has worked for centuries.
Click to expand...

Yep-

As if we needed more proof how dumb our group has become. There are no winners with this PBS agreement.

(I think this poor soul lost the coin toss concerning whether or not to be struck repeatedly in the head with a framing hammer.)

-It has "worked for centuries."
 
Last edited:
crj567 said:
Yep-

As if we needed more proof how dumb our group has become. There are no winners with this PBS agreement.

(I think this poor soul lost the coin toss concerning whether or not to be struck repeatedly in the head with a framing hammer.)

-It has "worked for centuries."
Click to expand...

You got a better idea?
 
crj567 said:
Yep-

As if we needed more proof how dumb our group has become. There are no winners with this PBS agreement.

(I think this poor soul lost the coin toss concerning whether or not to be struck repeatedly in the head with a framing hammer.)

-It has "worked for centuries."
Click to expand...

Wrong. We all win with PBS. We get the luxury of keeping our jobs, and proving to Jerry that we are willing to play ball. Management gets to bid for more work since we look more competitive.

WE would have been the only losers if we had voted this down. Jerry would just use that as proof that we aren't a good group of pilots to keep around, and shrink us one by one.
 
crj567 said:
Yep-

As if we needed more proof how dumb our group has become. There are no winners with this PBS agreement.
Click to expand...

The company saves money w/ PBS if they didn't then why push for it and why would most every other carrier both maojr and regional have it?

We make vast improvements to our monthly QOL by having greater ctrl over our skds. Maybe you don't care about QOL but most of us do. As others have tried to explain to you PBS was able to be negotiated rather than rammed down our throat. This is key as we were abe to pick our vendor and get better options in contract language.

The problems that come up we can work on during open book.
 
I just hope we can keep Uncle Rico. His mustache is fantastic. It whispers pro-pilot suggestions and delicious recipes into his ear while he is asleep. It's too bad his mustache doesn't blog the recipes.
 
Last edited:
atlcrjdriver said:
The company saves money w/ PBS if they didn't then why push for it and why would most every other carrier both maojr and regional have it?

We make vast improvements to our monthly QOL by having greater ctrl over our skds. Maybe you don't care about QOL but most of us do. As others have tried to explain to you PBS was able to be negotiated rather than rammed down our throat. This is key as we were abe to pick our vendor and get better options in contract language.

The problems that come up we can work on during open book.
Click to expand...


The lifers are opposed to any change, good or bad. Just get used to it.
 
If we didn't get it now we would get it via mediation/arbitration and it would've been a much worse product.

As far as vacation, we'll be able to maximize vacation and still get guarantee, sacrifice some guarantee for more vacation or build out to maximize pay. We have very little flexibility now.
 
PS I as very junior until a month ago and now I'm very senior. My vote was yes given both situations.
 
ASA_Aviator said:
Wrong. We all win with PBS. We get the luxury of keeping our jobs, and proving to Jerry that we are willing to play ball. Management gets to bid for more work since we look more competitive.

WE would have been the only losers if we had voted this down. Jerry would just use that as proof that we aren't a good group of pilots to keep around, and shrink us one by one.
Click to expand...
So by this logic we better give the company anything they want when they ask or Jerry will shrink us and we will all be out of a job? Not just sheep but stupid sheep!!!
 
atlcrjdriver said:
The company saves money w/ PBS if they didn't then why push for it and why would most every other carrier both maojr and regional have it?

We make vast improvements to our monthly QOL by having greater ctrl over our skds. Maybe you don't care about QOL but most of us do. As others have tried to explain to you PBS was able to be negotiated rather than rammed down our throat. This is key as we were abe to pick our vendor and get better options in contract language.

The problems that come up we can work on during open book.
Click to expand...

If you actually think we are making "vast improvements to our QOL and skds" as you assert, please save this post. Get back to me by this fall, and we will once again compare notes.

-There is no way any improvement to QOL or skds is going to come from any PBS vendor or program. If they put crappy tips into PBS (as they surely will,) we will only get crappy trips out the other side.

-To assume this is any type of "improvement" is as insane as believing our travel benefits and ESOP programs were actually "enhanced" somehow.
 
Last edited:
crj567 said:
Yep-

As if we needed more proof how dumb our group has become. There are no winners with this PBS agreement.

(I think this poor soul lost the coin toss concerning whether or not to be struck repeatedly in the head with a framing hammer.)

-It has "worked for centuries."
Click to expand...

Prove me wrong smart guy.
 
maxcackel said:
So by this logic we better give the company anything they want when they ask or Jerry will shrink us and we will all be out of a job? Not just sheep but stupid sheep!!!
Click to expand...

No. The logic goes that if the company wants something, we negotiate to get what we can. When the pilot group wants something, the company negotiates to get what it wants out of the deal.

Where are you that you think that everything will be fine and we can ask for and get anything? The you have the audacity to start in with the sheep comments simply because people don't agree with your highly valued opinion?

Just wow.....
 
Tarzan said:
No. The logic goes that if the company wants something, we negotiate to get what we can. When the pilot group wants something, the company negotiates to get what it wants out of the deal.

Where are you that you think that everything will be fine and we can ask for and get anything? The you have the audacity to start in with the sheep comments simply because people don't agree with your highly valued opinion?

Just wow.....
Click to expand...

Where is the discussion from SH and those in the puzzle palace about cost metrics? During our contract negotiations, we were told we had to meet x cost by y year, correct? Our union was so d*mn concerned about spewing all the gee whiz features of this software system to the pilot group, that in my mind, didn't address the real issue: What does this do for us financially (as a pilot group AND company financials) to make us a viable feed partner???

Where would our current number take us if we voted no, and where would they be anticipated with any anticipated future "growth." PBS will only work if we get growth....NT says growth is virtually certain with the passage of PBS.....I hope he's right.
 

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest resources

Latest media

Carbon Cub FX-3 Shenandoah Valley
Carbon Cub at Kittyhawk
FX-3 in the backcountry
IFR Panel in a Carbon Cub FX-3
Cub-Provo-UT-c.jpg
Back
Top