ASA "town hall" prediction

[Redan]

Successful professionals prepare for meetings and go in with an agenda.

I encourage everyone to write down their questions, with notes of specific failures of the ASA way of doing crew utilization and take this opportunity to register not only your anger...but your recognition of crew utilization's failure and ineptitude.

They keep saying we're 'adequately staffed' according to the crews:airframes ratio metric...but need to see that that ratio only works with competence and aptitude handling crew utilization.

Now this post does deserve a "well said."

 

[johnpeace]

I'm making my notes and am planning to make as many comments and questions as I'm allowed to.

I can't escape how freaking great it would be if every single question they took nailed JP to the floor and just enumerated the many failures of that department.

 

[JumpersAway]

I think we are staffed well............we just aren't UTILIZED well. If someone would have had the common sense to work crap pairings into productive 3 days, with lots of time off (at home) for everyone to keep line values low, the mood would be much different. It's one thing to have low credit lines, but a completely different animal when they are low credit, and lack time off. Frankly, that's what I'm pissed about. If you keep the line values low, fine..............just give me some bloody time off with it!

 

[JumpersAway]

Blesko- plenty of good things have come from other town meetings prior to this one.....

-Introduction of the 900's
-Procurement of ExpressJet (eventually will pay off for the better)
-Dulles base which saved the hides of 15 airframes slated for retirement
-More 700's

Granted, management has lost their way- we once marched step in step to make this a better place, resulting in a competitive airline. They're parting paths with us and it's not mutually beneficial. I can think of three people in management that are immediately responsible for this, and my hope is that they are replaced with competant leadership with some sense.......especially as it pertains to scheduling.

 

[johnpeace]

If someone would have had the common sense to work crap pairings into productive 3 days, with lots of time off (at home) for everyone to keep line values low, the mood would be much different. It's one thing to have low credit lines, but a completely different animal when they are low credit, and lack time off.

This is directly due to their incompetence. They pretended to lower reserve coverage by awarding more lines...but with 20-30 hr sits in your 4 day...you're basically a ready reserve. They're building themselves flexibility and additional effective reserve coverage, at the expense of your schedule....while claiming a victory in getting pilots off reserve.

 

[COOPERVANE]

That's exactly what I said in a different post. They have effectively made everybody an IROP reserve pilot ready to reshedule to cover regular reserves when they are mismanaged and wiped out.

Lineholders just don't know it yet, they are basking in the glow of their "sweet" schedules and saying "poor reserve suckers"

 

[Redan]

I think we are staffed well............we just aren't UTILIZED well. If someone would have had the common sense to work crap pairings into productive 3 days, with lots of time off (at home) for everyone to keep line values low, the mood would be much different. It's one thing to have low credit lines, but a completely different animal when they are low credit, and lack time off. Frankly, that's what I'm pissed about. If you keep the line values low, fine..............just give me some bloody time off with it!

I tend to agree again. However, some additional points if I may:

One of the shining examples of the shortcomings of US business in general, and ASA in particular is the aforementioned "metrics." Or could be called the "MBA syndrome." Of late, business schools have basically been teaching bean counting techniques focusing on bottom line costs irregardless of their effects on other aspects of the business. So we have these MBA rocket scientists who are only concerned with their own "metrics" and not concerned with their effects on other "metrics" in the operation. Consequently, we've seen about the worst case of corporate myopia possibly in history. While this isn't an entirely new phenomenon, it goes a long way to explaining the many corporate decisions that seem to defy logic and common sense. Typically the bewildered employees suffer the consequences while the managers enjoy their bonuses up in the glass tower. More astute management teams (i.e. Southwest) recognize the detrimental effects of this bean counting mentality on their businesses and that in actuality it probably costs more in the end.

When dealing with managers suffering from this type myopia, there is probably little chance of convincing them their business models are actually less cost efficient to their operation in ways not defined by "metrics." Typically, they are only interested in the opinions of those with MBA degrees on the wall, certainly not those of stupid pilots. Therefore, this is why as employees under collective bargaining, we have to help them along. For example, we must insist on much more detailed definitions of pairing construction, crew utilization, QOL issues, minimum staffing, etc. Company will immediately claim it's too costly. However the needed changes will only create more efficiency and ultimately lead to lower costs and a vastly improved working relationship. Additionally, this could help management see things in a different perspective and help them break out of their comfort zone. But we will have to grow backbones and be willing to step out of our comfort zones also. The only way to do this is through our contracts with company. At this very moment, we have a golden opportunity to fix many of these issues through the JCBA currently being negotiated. Folks, if we cannot muster the resolve to get it right this time, we will be well and truly farked.

 

[AV8700]

Staffing and schedules will improve if we just agree to dual qual

 

[Max Q]

Lineholders just don't know it yet, they are basking in the glow of their "sweet" schedules and saying "poor reserve suckers"

What makes you say this?

 

[COOPERVANE]

What makes you say this?

Based on the reaction of some junior guys holding a line for the first time. I really can't blame them though. Life is sweet compared to the hell that reserve has been the past year

I don't really think the senior guys think the schedules are "sweet" but I don't think they give a rats ass about guys on reserve.

BTW I'm not on reserve anymore either. I just feel they should be represented and treated fairly.

 

[johnpeace]

Life is sweet compared to the hell that reserve has been the past year

The potential now exists, and will likely come to fruition this summer, where a junior lineholder can bid and award a 70 hr/16 day schedule...then get extended an extra day on each 4 day trip, to wind up working 20 days for (70 + (3.87 * 4) ) hrs credit. That's only 85 hrs. If the min-day credits are paid at 150%, it's 93 hours of pay.

10 days off for 93 hrs pay!? No thanks!

That's if the company agrees to pay min-day at 150% premium...which by my reading of the contract is a little gray. How would you like to get extended to day 5 for 2.2 hrs credit paid at 150%? If only the credit time of the extension (with no min-day protection) is paid at 150% premium...it's even worse).

That's a raw deal. It's not really any better than being on reserve.

 

[crj567]

The potential now exists, and will likely come to fruition this summer, where a junior lineholder can bid and award a 70 hr/16 day schedule...then get extended an extra day on each 4 day trip, to wind up working 20 days for (70 + (3.87 * 4) ) hrs credit. That's only 85 hrs. If the min-day credits are paid at 150%, it's 93 hours of pay.

10 days off for 93 hrs pay!? No thanks!

That's if the company agrees to pay min-day at 150% premium...which by my reading of the contract is a little gray. How would you like to get extended to day 5 for 2.2 hrs credit paid at 150%? If only the credit time of the extension (with no min-day protection) is paid at 150% premium...it's even worse).

That's a raw deal. It's not really any better than being on reserve.

Yep-

And PBS is really just a "delivery system" ain't it... Many people still have no idea the vast potential for abuse in our system.

-We gave away the whole farm, and the one next door on this one.

 

[Max Q]

Coopervane: You must have seen a different group of folks than I. Everyone I have talked with is miserable at the idea of working more for less pay. Agreed on the senior guys not giving a flip about reserves, but I suppose I don't expect them too. I do expect adequate union representation for all parties, which reserves obviously didn't have with PBS. If I pick up a split trip, call in sick for that trip, and it causes the company to owe a reserve pilot min day, the pilot gets min day and the difference is taken out of my paycheck. Tough **** lineholders. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

(BTW: I am one of those lineholders just off 3 years of reserve)

 

[johnpeace]

Yep-

And PBS is really just a "delivery system" ain't it... Many people still have no idea the vast potential for abuse in our system.

-We gave away the whole farm, and the one next door on this one.

I don't think it's the fault of PBS...I see PBS as a delivery system.

The problems we're looking at now really are, as a number of people are saying, pairing construction problems. If you got a 68 hr month with 4 4-day trips under line bidding, you'd be no better off. If that's how the pairings were constructed, that's what most of us would get...PBS or not.

The problem here is that the association didn't demand pairing construction or trip rig language to protect us from something like this.

To their credit though...nobody would have believed this would be possible until seeing it.

Now that we know it's possible, we need to insist on contract language that will prevent it from happening in the future.

The big ones are:
- trip rigs
- higher per diem
- higher premium pay for extensions

They're trying to turn the lineholders into ready reserves, to increase their flexibility and cover up their ineptitude. We have to negotiate language that makes it too expensive to do it that way and forces them to competently manage their crew resources...that's the only way they'll be incentivized to put a competent (read: expensive) person in that position.

 

[Freebrd]

They be calling me at the airport and at home. don,t know what they want cause I ain,t home! Lol

 

[Redan]

JohnPeace, I agree although many did see this coming and gave warning. To be fair, there were those who stoically pointed out the shortcomings of the JCBA LOA prior to the vote for these very reasons.

One additional major point should be PAY PROTECTION for RESERVES. This is another item forcing company kicking and screaming, to utilize more efficient practices.

 

[johnpeace]

One additional major point should be PAY PROTECTION for RESERVES. This is another item forcing company kicking and screaming, to utilize more efficient practices.

What would pay protection for reserves include?

As a reserve pilot, I'm presently pay protected by:
- MMG
- min day credit
- min-day credit for unused reserve days if I go over 75 hrs

What are you thinking?

And yeah, my biggest issues for the next contract are that we make it too expensive for crew utilization to be stupid, lazy and inefficient. I want to force them to either do their jobs half competently or pay through the nose for it.

 

[Tailwind]

Reserves do NOT have min-day credit if they are given a NMD assignement paring in open time. This is happening more often than you think, and it must stop. But so far, all of our complaints have fallen on deaf ears...

 

[johnpeace]

Reserves do NOT have min-day credit if they are given a NMD assignement paring in open time. This is happening more often than you think, and it must stop. But so far, all of our complaints have fallen on deaf ears...

I can't believe people accept these assignments.

The basic, fundamental reality of our contract and all of the presumptions about employment are that we are compensated for our work.

This practice violates that most fundamental right to be compensated for labor given.

I wouldn't do it and would simply point out that since the assignment credits nothing and gets me no closer to being compensated under the rules of our contract, that I refuse.

I don't see how anyone would be able to fault me for refusing to work for free.

 

[Redan]

"Stupid, lazy and inefficient," exactly the way company likes it. They want to have all the cards in their hand and what we're seeing is pretty much that.

Reserve Pay Protection is the items you mentioned plus credit for trips assigned just like lineholders. Once a trip is assigned, it then becomes similar to an awarded trip in that they can change your schedule but they still owe you the credit value of the trip. For example, a 3 day is assigned worth 18 hours credit. Scheduling can still modify your pairing and reassign you, but you will receive at least the 18 hours credit or the credit value of the reassignment, whichever is higher. IMHO this would tighten up the abusive manipulative practices of Scheduling by forcing them to assign trips logically and reasonably versus the haphazard putting out of one fire after another methods they currently employ.

This item, just like all the other items mentioned previously, are utilized quite successfully at many other airlines. There would be up front costs including more sophisticated software and employees, but the dividends in efficiency outweigh those costs. And frankly, the QOL improvements provided by what we're suggesting result in intangible cost savings that can't be measured by their metrics. I find it difficult to understand how our management simply cannot grasp such basic tenets as: "happy pilots are cheap pilots."