How about this for PBS at ASA

[jstyle13]

This is a unique opportunity to have PBS with ALL of our input, vs. the Company forcing us to use it with little or no input.

Mabye I'm missing how all this works but how can we be forced to use PBS if we don't pass it via a vote?

 

[Clarence]

Thats Koolaid point number one. Make everyone feel as if PBS is inevitable. " you might as well have some say". Thats nonsense. Just Vote NO!

Unless of course you're in the top 20% of Captains, than by all means, take a chance.

 

[USCtrojan]

Mabye I'm missing how all this works but how can we be forced to use PBS if we don't pass it via a vote?

True, it must be passed by a majority, and it will be subject to a vote.

Trojan

 

[USCtrojan]

Thats Koolaid point number one. Make everyone feel as if PBS is inevitable. " you might as well have some say". Thats nonsense. Just Vote NO!

Unless of course you're in the top 20% of Captains, than by all means, take a chance.

Clarence, who in the Union did you talk to about PBS? Have you even spoken to anyone with any factual information, or are your spouting the "PBS SUCKS" because because because because of all the crappy things it does....?

Will you be willing to take a paycut in order to keep our current bidding system? We're gonna have to stay in line with everyone else. Too expensive=dead.

Trojan

 

[jstyle13]

Clarence, who in the Union did you talk to about PBS? Have you even spoken to anyone with any factual information, or are your spouting the "PBS SUCKS" because because because because of all the crappy things it does....?

Will you be willing to take a paycut in order to keep our current bidding system? We're gonna have to stay in line with everyone else. Too expensive=dead.

Trojan

I'm basing my opinion on PBS from what I hear from other airlines that have it and the guys I've talked to. Most of em seem to dislike it=my reasoning. Of course I'm willing to hear what they say about it.....

 

[USCtrojan]

I'm basing my opinion on PBS from what I hear from other airlines that have it and the guys I've talked to. Most of em seem to dislike it=my reasoning. Of course I'm willing to hear what they say about it.....

Why don't you talk to your Union Reps? Every PBS is different at every airline due to pilot input. I've talked to DU and NT the Cap'n Reps at length--DU anyway. He was a staunch opposer to it all until he saw how PBS will be implemented at ASA. Why don't you call your rep, and ask him. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised by what you hear. Just my opinion, but it's better than FI bs.

Trojan

 

[maxcackel]

Pbs saves money how? Less people needed, why is that a good thing for us? We have 80 out now. Lower bid position on the airplane, a pay cut because of less day's off a year, blind bidding, and the list goes on.

Sure the senior guy's including the union members you talk about might see a benefit in it, but the junior people will suffer for it.

 

[blesko]

What about the AdOpt system, and I refuse to talk to my union reps due to the face one specifically told me during the contract neg and "bonus" dispersion that if you dont like it, vote us out, because that's the way we're doing it, even though some of us are working on fiscal masters degrees and might know more than them. Anyway long story short, anyone brought this up yet? If you want specific days off, you get a bank of points to use to bid specific days off.

Not that I'm into helping the company out by any stretch of the imagination. I'll do my job, to the best of my ability, however, they talk about PBS, but ZERO on who, and what software they will use. BRING ON THE DEETS FIRST!!!! then allow us to make a decision.

 

[USCtrojan]

Pbs saves money how? Less people needed, why is that a good thing for us? We have 80 out now. Lower bid position on the airplane, a pay cut because of less day's off a year, blind bidding, and the list goes on.

Sure the senior guy's including the union members you talk about might see a benefit in it, but the junior people will suffer for it.

We don't get PBS, there will be a lot more than 80 that will hit the street. I haven't seen any details on PBS at ASA, you have? You've already made your decision based on speculation on FI? Please tell me what else to expect, because the people I've talked to on the working group say pretty much opposite of what you're talking about.

Our current bidding system "benefits the senior group." The bottom scheds are crap now.

Trojan

 

[USCtrojan]

What about the AdOpt system, and I refuse to talk to my union reps due to the face one specifically told me during the contract neg and "bonus" dispersion that if you dont like it, vote us out, because that's the way we're doing it, even though some of us are working on fiscal masters degrees and might know more than them. Anyway long story short, anyone brought this up yet? If you want specific days off, you get a bank of points to use to bid specific days off.

Not that I'm into helping the company out by any stretch of the imagination. I'll do my job, to the best of my ability, however, they talk about PBS, but ZERO on who, and what software they will use. BRING ON THE DEETS FIRST!!!! then allow us to make a decision.

Good idea, rather than talk to the only people who know anything about PBS (at ASA), you stick your head in the sand. If you believe some people who are representing you are not truthful, you need to start asking questions....This way you can piece together what you need to know and what you are hearing.

There's gonna be positives and negatives to this system. It won't be all positive and it won't be all negative as others have written. Think about the benefits of having it vs. not. Don't take my word for it, write BH. I did. I've talked to both the Company and Union at length over it. You'd be surprised what you learn if you just dig a little.

Trojan

 

[Tarzan]

Pbs saves money how? Less people needed, why is that a good thing for us? We have 80 out now. Lower bid position on the airplane, a pay cut because of less day's off a year, blind bidding, and the list goes on.

Sure the senior guy's including the union members you talk about might see a benefit in it, but the junior people will suffer for it.

You are missing the forest because there is a tree in the way.

Point #1 Since our costs are out of line with the rest of the DCI carriers in the 70-76 seat department, it will continue to be difficult to obtain new flying.
Point #2 The sooner we get our costs lower, the sooner we appeal to other carriers as a reasonable and efficient airline.

There are always survival periods when a company transitions from the old way to the new way. ASA happened to get nailed by a economic slowdown during theirs. These guys do no appear to be stepping over the dollar to get at the shiny dime (well sometimes). But there have large amounts of money spent in the near term for long term savings. All this planning is to get costs in line or even lower while have an airline that runs on time and completes it's flight. PBS is going to help with the costs. It will eventually mean more pilots when we secure some more flying.

 

[JoeMerchant]

Pbs saves money how? Less people needed, why is that a good thing for us? We have 80 out now. Lower bid position on the airplane, a pay cut because of less day's off a year, blind bidding, and the list goes on.

Sure the senior guy's including the union members you talk about might see a benefit in it, but the junior people will suffer for it.

The "junior people" will suffer the most as we shrink because we can't compete within the "portfolio concept"...PBS is a way to get those costs in line with some of our competitors.....Time to look at the big picture....

 

[HoserASA]

If ASA doesn't get these mtc deals under control, we won't have to worry about PBS! What's up with all the mtc delays and incidents?

Hoser
Roll Tide!

 

[USCtrojan]

If ASA doesn't get these mtc deals under control, we won't have to worry about PBS! What's up with all the mtc delays and incidents?

Hoser
Roll Tide!

It's because you've been getting your filthy 'Tide' hands all over them, so they're all breaking!!!! Stay away HOSER!!!!!

Trojan

 

[OCP]

Let me guess... 2 more pages on college football with you two?

 

[Brody1]

I was at OO when Brad sold this to us. It was the single worst thing that happened during my time there. I can't even begin to state the reasons why- too many of them. DON'T BUY INTO ALL THE CRAP THEY'RE TELLING YOU!! Take it from someone who's been on the receiving end of PBS.

Don't just vote no- vote HELL no.

 

[Tarzan]

I was at OO when Brad sold this to us. It was the single worst thing that happened during my time there. I can't even begin to state the reasons why- too many of them. DON'T BUY INTO ALL THE CRAP THEY'RE TELLING YOU!! Take it from someone who's been on the receiving end of PBS.

Don't just vote no- vote HELL no.

If it was so horrible, the pilot group would have organized.

 

[Brody1]

If it was so horrible, the pilot group would have organized.

Not quite that simple. There's a particular religious persuasion that's, shall we say, rather prevelant within the rank-and-file, as well as in management. Us non-believers felt as if we were outnumbered (although that may not have been the case). Many (but not all) of these folks weren't able to think for themselves- the church did it for them. At the time, the conventional wisdom coming from management was that PBS was good for the company- and any organized union (other than in-house) was bad. In that environment, organizing a union is a little like pushing a snowball uphill. Having personally been hosed in a big way more than once by ALPA, I was against bringing them on property. I thought we were better served by dissolving the current in-house union, and starting over with fresh blood.

 

[Stifler's Mom]

Yes, No or Undecided...please go to the roadshows and get informed either way.

We don't need another apathetic turnout when this vote happens.

 

[Smoke Toliet]

PBS for one list.

 

[Gr82Aviate]

Not quite that simple. There's a particular religious persuasion that's, shall we say, rather prevelant within the rank-and-file, as well as in management. Us non-believers felt as if we were outnumbered (although that may not have been the case). Many (but not all) of these folks weren't able to think for themselves- the church did it for them. At the time, the conventional wisdom coming from management was that PBS was good for the company- and any organized union (other than in-house) was bad. In that environment, organizing a union is a little like pushing a snowball uphill. Having personally been hosed in a big way more than once by ALPA, I was against bringing them on property. I thought we were better served by dissolving the current in-house union, and starting over with fresh blood.

SkyWest does not currently have, and has never had an "in-house union"!

 

[Speedtape]

SkyWest does not currently have, and has never had an "in-house union"!

Is it an in-house association?

 

[Brody1]

SkyWest does not currently have, and has never had an "in-house union"!

While it's true that we didn't pay them to be a union, they functioned very much like an in-house- in my opinion. I've worked for a carrier that had an in-house union. The pros and cons of which is better is a subject for another thread. The point here is that the union/association or whatever the hell you want to call them completely dropped the ball. They bit- hook, line, and sinker- into Brad's line of B.S. as he sung the praises of PBS. In some ways, the company was probably caught off-guard with how inadequate the software was. What people don't realize (until it's too late) is that each software 'glitch' or 'grey area' has a direct impact on someone's life. Little League games, dance recitals, etc. are missed while someone who is junior to you has the days off you bid for- and they didn't even bid for them! Happened all the time. What made it even more frustrating was mangement's relectance to a) admit there was even a problem, and b) do anything about it. I don't know if it's any better now, as it's been a couple of years since I worked there. One thing you guys need to ask yourselves, especially the bottom half of the seniority list, is what recourse will you have when things go wrong? As an example, what happens when a particular 'glitch' benefits the captains, but at the same time screws the FO's? Who will ALPA stand behind? Assuming they're going to back the implementation of PBS, they'll be reluctant to admit their mistake when the idea tanks, which it probably will.

Many of us were very negatively affected by the disaster that PBS was at SkyWest. I'd hate to see you guys go into this without both sides of the story. Good luck.

 

[HoserASA]

Let me guess... 2 more pages on college football with you two?

Nah, I leave the football stuff out this time, except for this: Bama is 5-2-0 vs his team, that's why he's soooo bitter!

Hoser
Roll Tide!

 

[PBRstreetgang]

Pbs saves money how? Less people needed, why is that a good thing for us? We have 80 out now. Lower bid position on the airplane, a pay cut because of less day's off a year, blind bidding, and the list goes on.

Sure the senior guy's including the union members you talk about might see a benefit in it, but the junior people will suffer for it.

NOOOOO,
Quit applying logic, PBS is a magical computer program, you impliment it, and magically start reaping the benefits. PBS is a concession, period. Why do you think Brad wants it so badly, more money for the company, because fewer pilots are needed and your schedules will be more "efficient", ie, you are working more for less. If you think you are getting anything other than AOS, you are dreaming. SKYW inc. already uses AOS and will stick it in your butt also.
PBR

 

[SSDD]

PBS and pairing quality are two different things. PBS gives you a degree of flexibility that is not available with hard lines, but you have to do your homework, and learn how to use the system.

If ALPA does its homework, takes the good things, and the bad things from other carriers, and puts them in the contract, then I think you'll like PBS.

As I said, pairing quality? That's a different subject.

The bottom third of the list gets the leftovers, but isn't that always the case?

 

[Brody1]

PBS and pairing quality are two different things. PBS gives you a degree of flexibility that is not available with hard lines, but you have to do your homework, and learn how to use the system.

If ALPA does its homework, takes the good things, and the bad things from other carriers, and puts them in the contract, then I think you'll like PBS.

As I said, pairing quality? That's a different subject.

The bottom third of the list gets the leftovers, but isn't that always the case?

Assume ALPA will not do its homework, and be pleasantly surprised if they do.

You're absolutely correct in saying that pairing quality and PBS are two different animals, but consider this example: I need certain days off next month, and my company has a hotline to assist in our 'transition' to PBS. I bid , but don't 'submit' until I call our resident hotline guru and tell him what I'm trying to do, and ask him to look over my bids to make sure what I bid will give me the best chance for said schedule. He gives me the thumbs-up, and compliments me on the fact that I 'did my homework'. The bids are posted a few days later, and I'm on reserve for the next month. To add insult to injury, I don't have ANY of the days off that I requested. I find out that there are several guys junior to me in my base that have hard lines, and a couple of them have the days off that I need. (Side note- this info regarding other pilots' schedules is not posted anywhere. It's obtained by chance encounters and conversations with other pilots in my base. In other words, if I hadn't run into certain individuals and discussed PBS issues, I would have never known that I'd been screwed) I call the same idiot on the hotline and say "WTF." He tells me that they're learning about all the software glitches through experiences such as mine. He assures me that it will be corrected. By the time I had resigned over a year later, this was still happening.

The above example had nothing to do with pairings. If I'm too junior to hold certain days off or pairings, then thats the breaks, and I have to adjust to it. But if the system implemented by the company, and endorsed by the union/association is full of flaws that take away my ability to bid and hold what I should, I don't want to hear your excuses- I want you to fix it. And when you don't, I want someone to be accountable for it. Let's face it, our schedules are our lives. What little control we have over our schedules, especially at the lower half of the senority list, shouldn't be taken away.

There were countless other examples similar to the one above that happened both to me and my co-workers. In my mind, it was inexcusable.

To be fair, not everyone had a problem with PBS. I ran into pilots who loved it- although more often I encountered pilots who didn't.

 

[SSDD]

Your example is the difference between having ALPA, and having nothing(SAPA). Management wanted it, SAPA "agreed", that was that.

Also you have to take into account that Skywest was the launch customer for AOS(?). To their credit a lot of changes have been made. But the learning curve came at our expense! Today, you hardly hear the kind of complaints you're talking about, and when you do, its typically because the bidder made a mistake.

ASA has ALPA on their side, and the program they would be getting is much improved over what Skywest got 2 years ago.

 

[Speedtape]

SkyWest has the AOS PBS. Their system is not transparent and does not give a report to them after they bid, so you can't learn what you did wrong to help you learn to bid. They have to call someone at the company to seek answers to their questions about their bid. The company controls the information and the quality of the answer.

AOS uses logic that looks for overall (global) solutions rather than give a pilot bidding at a given time the best pairing for his situation. That's how someone junior can get a better trip or days off. It does not honor seniority to the letter of the law. Then, as in any system, if the pilot does not understand the logic and how he should bid, then the pilot can harm himself by his choices.

It has been reported to be a system that is one of the worst in backfilling, or dumping trips on a guy's line that he did not bid, to get rid of open time near the end of it's processing. This means because it does not really honor seniority, that when it computes a specific pilot's bid, it may look down at other bids below to see what they need before assigning the specific pilot, and then at a final iteration at the end of processing, may get rid of open time by assigning it to any line that may be legal to accept it.

Overall, any PBS system is a concession. It avoids conflicts and assigns trips in a way there is never a conflict, because known events are loaded ahead of time before one bids,ie, vacation, carry-ins, mil leave, sick leave, jury leave, check rides, RGT, or any other known absence. By reducing conflicts alone, it creates more available days for flying for the entire pilot group. Since it helps create more available days, it can greatly reduce the headcount needed to do the same amount of work. This results in efficiencies, and if the work remains the same, it can reduce the headcount to do the same amount of work. If the amount of work increases, PBS can utilize the same amount of pilots to handle the increased work--at least to some point.

 

[SSDD]

Speedtape,

I pretty much agree with your post except for the last two sentences in the first paragraph. The PBS instructors are line pilots and flight attendants. You can call anyone of them, and they will give you an honest answer. This information is not controlled by the company.