ERJ XJT PBS Questions

[Freebrd]

well put. Focus more on pairing construction language and combine gains there with the current PBS system and we'll have a winner.

Bingo! We do need more say/control over pairing construction. Great post Speedtape. And keep Vac Low! And increase min day which ties in with improved paring construction.

 

[SSDD]

Reading these posts, I get the feeling that the XJT group does not really understand PBS. It seems they are trying to hold on to line bidding "benefits" that are not needed with PBS. I understand that trying to hang on to hard fought agreements is important, but negotiating for a lot of those things is wasted capital. They are not necessary in real life bidding with PBS.

As someone who's been using PBS for quite a few years, globalization, would be a deal breaker.

 

[dojetdriver]

The real argument to consider is a seniority based system versus a GLOBALIZED system. If a system is globalized, it does not matter whether it is AOS, Navtek, Carmen, or Smartpref. The pilots of Continental have a globalized system.

Although Continental pilots have few PBS rules, which contribute to the dissatisfaction level, the GLOBLIZATION is also a major factor in that it allows the software to ignore the desires of the crewmember so that it may assign the pairings that it needs to assign to achieve certain goals. In simple terms, there may be a specific pairing that may be available to a crewmember that the crewmember has bid. However, if the software determines that it needs that pairing elsewhere, then the crewmember will be denied that specific pairing and another pairing will be assigned that meets the need of the solution that the software is trying to achieve. There is little transparency and no predictability for the crewmember.

Flightline's Prefbid is the only seniority based system without GLOBALIZATION. If a crewmember bids for a specific pairing, and it is available to the crewmember, it will be awarded so long as it does not conflict with a pre-assigned pairing or other pre-assigned activity, and there are no other legality issues such as block buffers, FAR violations, and the awarding does not exceed the wide credit window. Of all the systems, it honors seniority to the greatest extent.

In a globalized system there is the potential that every pilot bidding can be affected by the globalization process. In a globalized system, the software seeks solutions that can basically ignore crewmember requests to the degree necessary to obtain a satisfactory solution, depending on staffing and the number of hours that need to be covered. The goal is for the software to assign the time on every available pilot's line driving toward a solution with very little or no open time and also to drive most all pilots to an average line value. Normally, the credit windows are very narrow to assist in achieving this goal. Some have called it socialization of the schedules.

In summary, individual pilots will get greater schedule satisfaction from a seniority based system. If a crewmember bids correctly, and with a wide credit window, the crewmember will get better schedule satisfaction in both the specific types of trips he desires, and also the line value ($) that he chooses that determines his pay. In a GLOBALIZED system, the crewmember will lose control over specific trips that may be available to him, and in addition, he can lose control over the line value that he would like awarded to achieve desired pay.

As pilots, we strive to control our environment to the greatest extent possible. It is a common thread that we all share. So, why would we not want a schedule bidding system that gives us the most authority possible to control one of the most important elements in our job--Our Schedules! Globalization greatly diminishes that ability for a pilot to control his schedule. Ask any Contiental pilot.

Flightline's Prefbid, a seniority based awarding system, gives the crewmember the greatest amount of control over two of the most important parts of his job--the Schedule and his pay. Most pilots would want a system that grants them the ability to have the most control over their schedule and their pay.

Thank for the informative post, but just for some clarification;

What Globalization is is it’s the ability of the software to come to a solution. Globalization CAN be bad as in a CAL system. The Carmen system will in fact take a trip from the #1 pilot to use on a junior pilots line. Smartpref is different. It will only globalize below the constrained group. The system calculates where the line falls based on many things…..average credit time per line, stacks of trips etc. At some point if the solution is allowed to award trips to whomever want them it will be unable to complete the rest of the lines below it. In testing this line fell around the bottom 35%.

Now isn't that something? The junior guys are less likely to get ALL their preferences met. Just like with flightline, just like line bidding, etc etc etc. Never mind if unstack is exercised. Moving on........

Being in the constrained group is not the end of the world. It might mean if you’re at the top of that group that you have to fly 87 hours instead of 85. In the middle it might mean you have to work days that you wanted off. At the bottom…..just like line bid or just like fligtline, bidder gets the remaining pairings. Now compare that to Flightline. There is no globalization. The software is really nothing more than a pairing sorter. It assigns trips that people want. It doesn’t care…nor does it know if it will achieve an optimal solution. So it could get to the end and have 1000’s or hours open. It also disregards seniority because it will allow some senior pilots to be assigned reserve while junior pilots are given flying. This problem does not exist in a global environment. So then how does the company cover the schedule? Well, instead of “globalizing” it “socializes”. It causes the company to raise the credit window that a line will be awarded in. ASA has had many months where the minimum line was 85-90 hours. So EVERYONE had to have that credit value to have a line awarded. Meanwhile pilots on vacation….junior pilots were only required to work 65 hours of credit. Since the system cannot look ahead and see the end result people running the software has to select different methods of assignment called “sort biases”. So we’re leaving it up to a human being to determine what is best. Because in each sort bias a bidder will get different assignments (unless they are very very specific). A globalized system knows up front what is possible….Smartpref takes it one step further and will immediately display the results based on what more senior pilots have already bid or have as a standing bid.

 

[Nevets]

The real argument to consider is a seniority based system versus a GLOBALIZED system. If a system is globalized, it does not matter whether it is AOS, Navtek, Carmen, or Smartpref. The pilots of Continental have a globalized system.

Although Continental pilots have few PBS rules, which contribute to the dissatisfaction level, the GLOBLIZATION is also a major factor in that it allows the software to ignore the desires of the crewmember so that it may assign the pairings that it needs to assign to achieve certain goals.

CAL does have few PBS rules. And there are rules that could be put in place to mitigate the effects of globalization. Just because smartpref use globalization, it doesn't mean it'll be the same as CAL's Carmen PBS.

 

[Texx]

Thank for the informative post, but just for some clarification;

What Globalization is is it’s the ability of the software to come to a solution. Globalization CAN be bad as in a CAL system. The Carmen system will in fact take a trip from the #1 pilot to use on a junior pilots line. Smartpref is different. It will only globalize below the constrained group. The system calculates where the line falls based on many things…..average credit time per line, stacks of trips etc. At some point if the solution is allowed to award trips to whomever want them it will be unable to complete the rest of the lines below it. In testing this line fell around the bottom 35%.

Now isn't that something? The junior guys are less likely to get ALL their preferences met. Just like with flightline, just like line bidding, etc etc etc. Never mind if unstack is exercised. Moving on........

Being in the constrained group is not the end of the world. It might mean if you’re at the top of that group that you have to fly 87 hours instead of 85. In the middle it might mean you have to work days that you wanted off. At the bottom…..just like line bid or just like fligtline, bidder gets the remaining pairings. Now compare that to Flightline. There is no globalization. The software is really nothing more than a pairing sorter. It assigns trips that people want. It doesn’t care…nor does it know if it will achieve an optimal solution. So it could get to the end and have 1000’s or hours open. It also disregards seniority because it will allow some senior pilots to be assigned reserve while junior pilots are given flying. This problem does not exist in a global environment. So then how does the company cover the schedule? Well, instead of “globalizing” it “socializes”. It causes the company to raise the credit window that a line will be awarded in. ASA has had many months where the minimum line was 85-90 hours. So EVERYONE had to have that credit value to have a line awarded. Meanwhile pilots on vacation….junior pilots were only required to work 65 hours of credit. Since the system cannot look ahead and see the end result people running the software has to select different methods of assignment called “sort biases”. So we’re leaving it up to a human being to determine what is best. Because in each sort bias a bidder will get different assignments (unless they are very very specific). A globalized system knows up front what is possible….Smartpref takes it one step further and will immediately display the results based on what more senior pilots have already bid or have as a standing bid.

Do you know how many, the number of days and what % of ASA pilots were unstacked in 2011?

And when would the globalization take place under the system you are proposing. During the bidding window or once the window closes?


If this system that you are talking about is only going to be used in the secondary process for xjt bidding why is there such a strong push to try to sell it to the ASA pilots?

 

[dojetdriver]

Do you know how many, the number of days and what % of ASA pilots were unstacked in 2011?

According to CRJ pilots, "it's been used on every major holiday" Care to dispute a claim of some of the CRJ pilots?

And when would the globalization take place under the system you are proposing. During the bidding window or once the window closes?

I'm NOT proposing ANYTHING, not ANY PBS system. Show me where I am? Just like Speedtape did, I'm simply putting out information relevant to the system.

If this system that you are talking about is only going to be used in the secondary process for xjt bidding why is there such a strong push to try to sell it to the ASA pilots?

Where is the proof that it's being sold to the ASA pilots? Where you in on the executive session? Are privvy to all these juicy details of what allegedly went down but has yet to be proven?

 

[OCP]

The only reason junior people get lines above senior people comes on months where we have AQP. The AQP is such a low credit that the system can't make a schedule. This was not foreseen when everyone agreed to the system. All this would take to fix is attaching 4 hrs of virtual credit to a month of AQP. Problem solved. Seniority retained.

 

[Texx]

According to CRJ pilots, "it's been used on every major holiday" Care to dispute a claim of some of the CRJ pilots?



I'm NOT proposing ANYTHING, not ANY PBS system. Show me where I am? Just like Speedtape did, I'm simply putting out information relevant to the system.



Where is the proof that it's being sold to the ASA pilots? Where you in on the executive session? Are privvy to all these juicy details of what allegedly went down but has yet to be proven?

1. You might want to get the facts first because the ones your stating are incorrect.

2. You have continued to try to convince ASA pilots that this PBS program is the best out there. ASA already has a PBS program.

3. As for the executive session, I really have no idea what you are talking about. That's over my pay grade but it sounds like it's keeping you up at night. You might want to have that looked at. It could get worst as you get older.

Oh I forgot one thing....you never did answer the questions.

 

[DHPFLYN]

Just curious but if I recall you haven't even had your contract for 2 years but have over 50 MOU's already. Why would you have so many in such a short time?

 

[Speedtape]

Originally Posted by dojetdriver

Thank for the informative post, but just for some clarification;
Thanks for the opportunity to have some frank, and hopefully honest dialogue.

What Globalization is is it’s the ability of the software to come to a solution.
I would agree with the very basic premise of this statement, however, it is an over simplification of the real process and implies a benign result of GLOBALIZATION.
Globalization CAN be bad as in a CAL system. The Carmen system will in fact take a trip from the #1 pilot to use on a junior pilots line. Smartpref is different.
Smartpref is different only in name and it still employs the use of GLOBALIZATION, just like Carmen. Because it employs GLOBALIZATION, Smartpref can also deny a pairing bid by a bidder, and award to a more junior bidder when the GLOBALIZATION process is implemented. It can also award a pairing that was way down my list or not at all.
It will only globalize below the constrained group. The system calculates where the line falls based on many things…..average credit time per line, stacks of trips etc. At some point if the solution is allowed to award trips to whomever want them it will be unable to complete the rest of the lines below it. In testing this line fell around the bottom 35%.
“It will only globalize below the constrained group.” I think you meant it will only globalize below the constraint line, which defines the constrained group (the unlucky GLOBALIZED pilots). In a GLOBALIZED system, such as Carmen and Smartpref, you are correct in that these systems depend on GLOBALIZATION as the base logic to solve problems in arriving at the desired solution. By constraining “the Constrainer” with work rules, these type systems cannot achieve maximum efficiency and possibly not arrive at any acceptable solution—to the Pilot Group or its Company. In testing you stated this line fell around the bottom 35%. I would submit that that is probably way below actual results in a normal month. Regardless, we should all care about that 35% and the fact that whatever the number is, that those pilots do not get to enjoy schedule satisfaction (within their seniority) to the same degree as every pilot above that LINE. Do the bottom 35% not matter? Apparently not to some!


Now isn't that something? The junior guys are less likely to get ALL their preferences met. Just like with flightline, just like line bidding, etc etc etc. Never mind if unstack is exercised. Moving on........
Read my last 2 sentences above. The junior guys MATTER, and to the greatest extent possible, (within their seniority) should be able bid with authority to achieve the best schedule they can achieve. Why should they be sacrificed? Yes, there are limits in any system. None can make you more senior. However, no system should make a crewmember less senior by using egregious processes, when there are other options.

Being in the constrained group is not the end of the world. It might mean if you’re at the top of that group that you have to fly 87 hours instead of 85. In the middle it might mean you have to work days that you wanted off. At the bottom…..just like line bid or just like fligtline, bidder gets the remaining pairings.
Being in the constrained group is not the end of the world, but it means that the bidder loses authority to bid for specific pairings that are available to him at his seniority. He is exposed to the unknown whims of the GLOBALIZED software and the solution that it seeks. In other words, the bidder has his Preferred pairing order ignored to some degree depending on many factors. The bidder could be assigned one or more pairings that fall way down in his preferences, even if more desirable trips were available to him. In the end, it can be much more drastic than working a few more hours, working on days he wanted off, and allowing the software to ignore his preferences, even in the remaining trip inventory. There is less predictability and less schedule satisfaction when a bidder gets little to no say in the outcome.
Now compare that to Flightline. There is no globalization. The software is really nothing more than a pairing sorter. It assigns trips that people want. It doesn’t care…nor does it know if it will achieve an optimal solution. So it could get to the end and have 1000’s or hours open.
Flight line has no glogalization, but it is much more than a pairing sorter. It does generally assign trips that pilots want (isn’t that the goal?). The main goal is to award pairings and build legal schedules that match pairings that a pilot builds in his Preferences. If a specific pairing has been bid and is available, and otherwise is legal, it will be awarded except for conflicts with previously assigned pairings awarded in a higher preference or another pre-assigned activity (vacation, leave, training, etc.) To the greatest extent of any PBS system, it awards by seniority. The system uses different logic from GLOBALIZATION to achieve maximum schedule satisfaction for ALL pilots, without disenfranchising the bottom 35% or whatever the real number in a GLOBALIZED system. “It will never reach a solution with 1000’s of hours open”—please, don’t misrepresent the facts. Furthermore, it can produce very acceptable solutions that balance Pilot Preferences with acceptable levels of opentime.
It also disregards seniority because it will allow some senior pilots to be assigned reserve while junior pilots are given flying. This problem does not exist in a global environment.
No senior pilot in a position will ever be forced on Reserve—end of statement! However, pilots on the bubble, can be assigned Reserve in any system if the pilot cannot achieve enough credit with the remaining pairings available to reach the credit window range. All pairings that remain, are available to that pilot first, before any pilot junior to him is processed. There may be instances where a pilot has some pre-assigned activities that are in conflict with the pairings that remain to the point that said pilot cannot achieve enough awarded credit to reach the credit window. If a pilot cannot reach the credit window, he will be placed on Reserve as the last resort. In addition, said pilot may have no pre-assigned credit and yet remaining pairings are insufficient for the pilot to reach the credit window. This all depends how others above him bid, and what shakes out. There are instances where a pilot junior to said pilot, has a different amount of pre-assigned credit, and then by luck, can achieve enough awarded credit to reach the credit window. The junior pilot can be awarded a line because his circumstances are different. By the way, this can happen in any PBS system. One major airline in the Southeast that has a GLOBALIZED system experiences the same issue. They call them “lucky lineholders” and as a pilot group, they have decided to allow it. Everyone has vacation. Having a vacation is one way that this can happen.
In summary, this is a scenario that can be allowed or not allowed. It can occur in every PBS system, because in PBS, you are not bidding on lines, you are bidding on trips. In addition, all activities are placed on a pilot’s schedule and usually carry a credit towards bidding. However, if not allowed, it will result in more trips forced into opentime. These trips are usually not high quality trips, and can end up being assigned to Reserve pilots in the end.
So then how does the company cover the schedule? Well, instead of “globalizing” it “socializes”. It causes the company to raise the credit window that a line will be awarded in.
GLOBALIZING is socializing. At ASA, the credit window has never been raised. However, it has been lowered.
(Part 1--Continued)

 

[Speedtape]

Part 2

ASA has had many months where the minimum line was 85-90 hours. So EVERYONE had to have that credit value to have a line awarded.
There have been some months where the window was high. However, the high credit windows were forced or induced by poor planning. You cannot decide to hire and train for the summer starting in May or June. Hiring requires training pilots already on the property for transitions and upgrades. You cannot have 25% of your current pilots “unavailable” for the busiest time of the year because they are in training through July. A better decision would have been to hire and train earlier, or not at all. This created the strains on the system. However, in the end, the flying will be covered. It is either built into lines with higher line values, or it is covered by extreme measures of extending, junior-manning, and flying the heck out of the Reserves.
By the way, this can also happen in line bidding. If memory serves me correctly, in the recent past, legacy XJet was way understaffed by the previous management. This created mayhem. Your pilots were flying the limits, with all methods employed in extending and junior-manning, and also cancelling flights in record numbers. Thus, this is the reason for all the hiring over the last year. Has it gotten better? Personally, under either of the above circumstances, I would rather pick my poison and have the time placed on my line to the point I have no utility. Some would rather get extended or junior-manned at premium pay. I prefer some degree of predictability and would reluctantly prefer to have a pre-set schedule.
Meanwhile pilots on vacation….junior pilots were only required to work 65 hours of credit. Since the system cannot look ahead and see the end result people running the software has to select different methods of assignment called “sort biases”. So we’re leaving it up to a human being to determine what is best. Because in each sort bias a bidder will get different assignments (unless they are very very specific).
Everyone gets a vacation. Most pilots want one in the Summer when their kids are out of school. Our pilots wanted to be able to extend their vacation. I am sure from what I have heard, so do yours. But yes, the flying has to be covered by the remaining pilots. How does it work on your property because your pilots can conflict their trips out with vacation and extend their vacations also?
In Prefbid, a pilot’s seniority is always honored. If he bids enough, no pairing is assigned that he did not bid on. If he is not specific in his bidding, then the software attempts to award as many of the matched trips in a Preference that it can. However, if some of the trips conflict, because they start on the same day, and he does not further refine his preference to move certain trips up in priority, then he is basically saying all matched trips are equal to me, “software award me a trip.” Give me as many as you can. Sort biases are simply a way to select from the trips that conflict. There has to be a method to pick a trip. Under these circumstances, his seniority has been honored, and he has been awarded a pairing from the ones he chose, but showed no further preference. The pilot understands this logic and knows he can further prioritize those pairings if he chooses to make a specific pairing in that group more important. Otherwise, there is no mind reading, and some method has to be employed to award conflicting trips. It is not a bad thing. Personally, I would rather have pilots choose the methods versus any options that automation would choose that may not be in my best interest. If it bothers anyone that much, then bid more specifically so that no methods are needed in processing that pilot’s schedule. The Pilot has control if he chooses to exercise it.
A globalized system knows up front what is possible….Smartpref takes it one step further and will immediately display the results based on what more senior pilots have already bid or have as a standing bid.
Yes, that feature is nice. But what happens in the real world when GLOBALIZATION executes. That feature is greatly outweighed by the compromise of GLOBALIZATION. Again, GLOBALIZATION takes Power from the Pilots. It can affect the quality of your schedule in the pairings it chooses, and it can affect your pocketbook in the line value that you receive ($). Most of us desire the best schedule we can obtain, and control over the amount of money that we want to make. Likewise, it can cause you to fly more than you want. Bottom line, give me a bidding system that offers the most control that I can have in determining my quality of life by the pairings I choose, and the money that I determine that I want to make. That requires a system that honors seniority to the greatest extent possible and is available to all pilots on the list, not a system that utilizes voodoo logic in the form that cannot be explained or predicted!

 

[Texx]

Just curious but if I recall you haven't even had your contract for 2 years but have over 50 MOU's already. Why would you have so many in such a short time?

I'm sorry but you were saying what about 2 years?

Date of Signing: November 20, 2007
Duration: November 20, 2007 ~ November 20, 2010

 

[Speedtape]

Just curious but if I recall you haven't even had your contract for 2 years but have over 50 MOU's already. Why would you have so many in such a short time?

Since you brought it up, I read through all the MOUs. The first 20 or so were implementation documents from the 2007 contract. Some of those simply laid out a timeline of when the contract improvements would be implemented and how. Others further defined the terms of the contract too make sure we captured intent and to mitigate future grievances. There are others that later improved our contract. There are others that helped support our bidding system documentation. Others that laid out how our PBS system would be implemented and requirements of the performance before we would go live. A few that provided protection for some of our pilots that took leaves to fly for a venture in Viet Nam. One or more that deal with ASAP implementation and operation. Some others that memorialized issues that were not covered in the contract. But, overall, these documents help strengthen our contract and capture new practices and policies that arise after the contract is signed. I am not a lawyer, but I would guess that the more documentation you have to protect your work rules and pay, and in some cases actually improve on what you already have is a very good thing. That is why there are so many.

What raises the issue for you?

 

[CEO silly sap]

8hrs ...4hours pay..

Seriously, you work 8 hrs and get paid 4hrs?
Did you actually agree to that BS!

I thought you had to be smart and educated to be a pilot, but you take half pay for your work. Does the CEO do that too?

 

[OCP]

Seriously, you work 8 hrs and get paid 4hrs?
Did you actually agree to that BS!

I thought you had to be smart and educated to be a pilot, but you take half pay for your work. Does the CEO do that too?

I don't know how this was ever agreed too, but its been in the last 3 contracts. Why this is acceptable I don't know.