Jumpseat and Politics

[Fubijaakr]

Thats a pretty sad reflection on your "Union".

 

[dicko]

Our Pro standards is a waste of time and a paper tiger. 100% worthless, with a bunch a little girls in the positions. If I was the said pilot, I would go down to DAL(solo) and talk to SWA mgt. .Tell your side,dont lye and man up. SWAPA Pro, Standards would hurt this guy more than help.

That's a shame. Pro Standards has the potential to be a valuable tool for us. The AirTran Pro standards seems to have been a good 'stop gap' that our CP has allowed as an alternative to the hammer. There are obvious exceptions where politics, Union stuff etc. got in the way.

 

[slaquer5]

That's a shame. Pro Standards has the potential to be a valuable tool for us. The AirTran Pro standards seems to have been a good 'stop gap' that our CP has allowed as an alternative to the hammer. There are obvious exceptions where politics, Union stuff etc. got in the way.

It is a shame about our pro standards. They are mostly egomaniacs that want to become a check airman,except the company knows them for who they are. Actually some of our PS pilots are high avoidance for the FOs We have had several pilots at SWA threaten pro standards that if they keep up there unprofessional behavior they will take it to the CP. I personally would rather deal with our CPs. They are a good group and I have seen them many times bend over backwards for our pilots. If I was incharge of SWAPA, pro standards, it would be ALL First Officers. NO captains.

Like I said, if this AT guy in question is a good guy, that made a mistake. I think he should go to DAL and man up.

 

[Dan Roman]

It is a shame about our pro standards. They are mostly egomaniacs that want to become a check airman,except the company knows them for who they are. Actually some of our PS pilots are high avoidance for the FOs We have had several pilots at SWA threaten pro standards that if they keep up there unprofessional behavior they will take it to the CP. I personally would rather deal with our CPs. They are a good group and I have seen them many times bend over backwards for our pilots. If I was incharge of SWAPA, pro standards, it would be ALL First Officers. NO captains.

Like I said, if this AT guy in question is a good guy, that made a mistake. I think he should go to DAL and man up.

I am very curious the ways your ProStan is harmful? It's supposed to be the protection for handling a problem without it going to management.
What do they do?

 

[shootr]

It's not so much that they're harmful. It's that they have no power to do anything because management generally won't do anything about problem guys. Why would a senior guy listen to pro-standards when it really won't go past that stage, anyway? Luckily we have very few problem pilots...we just have to live with them. One negative about this place but it's a small one.

As an FO, I was actually asked to become a pro-standards guy. I declined because I really didn't see the point. I do see how a checkperson wannabe may take the position just to get their name out there without really having to do anything (there is no pay for being a pro-standards guy). There are some good guys doing it. The program just doesn't have any teeth.

shootr

 

[slaquer5]

I am very curious the ways your ProStan is harmful? It's supposed to be the protection for handling a problem without it going to management.
What do they do?

Shooter sums it up pretty well. Pro standards is worthless and some of the Capt. on pro standards are high avoidance w/ FOs. First of all it should only be FOs on the P/S.

Second our Mgt. is not out to get anyone, Pro Standards helps the trouble makes because no one takes it further than P/S.

Our pro standards is so out to lunch, I have seen them trying to harass a pilot for picking up a trip another pilot put in give away. The pilot that put the trip in giveaway wanted his trip back 2 weeks later after it looked like he would not be able to pick something up better. Pro standards is telling the pilot that picked up the trip to to just suck it up and give it back,
. I am sure it works well at other airlines, but at SWA they are for the most part egomaniac idiots ,that want to check airman,but cant..

We have had several pilots threaten pro standards, that they will go to SWA Mgt. because of how P/S acts.

My advice to any SWA pilot is to talk to the individual directly, if that does not work go talk to one of your CPs. JMO

 

[slaquer5]

Thats a pretty sad reflection on your "Union".

I hate to say I agree with you on this. ALL P/S does at SWA is protect the dic heads like yourself. I am sure you would love our pro standards, a nice shield for you to hide behind.

 

[Fubijaakr]

Pro standards is telling the pilot that picked up the trip to to just suck it up and give it back,

That's just wrong. If the original pilot dumped the trip then HE has to suck it up. Once the trip is gone, its gone.

I hate to say I agree with you on this. ALL P/S does at SWA is protect the dic heads like yourself.

That's quite an assumption. If, however, what you say is true, your ProStan committee is 180 out from what they should be doing. ProStan is supposed to be the cushion between the pilots and the Company. If you get more satisfaction from going directly to the BCP, then your ProStan committee needs to be disbanded or gutted.

 

[slaquer5]

That's just wrong. If the original pilot dumped the trip then HE has to suck it up. Once the trip is gone, its gone.



That's quite an assumption. If, however, what you say is true, your ProStan committee is 180 out from what they should be doing. ProStan is supposed to be the cushion between the pilots and the Company. If you get more satisfaction from going directly to the BCP, then your ProStan committee needs to be disbanded or gutted.

Ok you need to stop posting stuff I agree with


PS have a good thanksgiving

 

[chase]

shootr,

There isn't a pro standards program out there in the industry that has "teeth"....consequences are not desired by unions/associations because "consequences"="punishments"; therefore it is all in the eyes of the beholder if the "teeth" wanted is really desired...I for one do.

Pro Stands needs leverage, consequences, whatever one wants to call it to get the bad apples (few as they are) to either get better or ......what?

There is a lot of steps between a mere "meeting to discuss" and firing someone...unions shouldn't fire anyone, they didn't hire them but there are many ways to get a pilots attention who continually makes the other pilot or crew members miserable:

1. Change their bidding priority when put against those who avoidance bid him/her....there must be a trigger point (% of avoidance bidders) where this kicks in but a threshold is possible...once the bad actors loose the preferred lines/bids, they will understand the consequences clearly.

2. Suggest attending third party, professionally run sessions that can get to the root cause....if they refuse the "Dr Phil camp for pilot"....that gets noted and taken into consideration down the road.

3. "Outing" bad actors when their behavior reaches a certain point; use peer pressure but it must be public. Take avoidance bid list from flt ops and turn it over to PS and use the list to shine the light of day on the problem children...flt ops stays out of it completely. We have bad actors acting badly toward our own...we can fix it if we want to....if the bad actors mistreat other employee groups, then a different story but the union is obligated to engage on their behalf.

4. We evaluate/fill out survey new hires; repeated bad actors need to know they are being evaluated also...fellow crewmembers are asked to fill out after each trip sequence....this would identify if the problem is the pilot in question or others besides making the truly bad actors have to show improvement.

5. Why should the youngest have to put up with the worse? Bad actors get avoided by trading from lines but most likely when folks call in sick....who flies with them? The reserves who can't avoid them....should our youngest be sentenced to this type of punishment? How much luv is sucked out of these young guys in having to tolerate Mr/Ms. Not-Congeniality?

6. Money....consistent bad behavior that gets no better over time....unions/associations have the legal right to "fine" members...if behavior continues to be abusive and no apparent change....a "fine" is appropriate or force the pilot in question to become a commuter for xx months....donate the money to some charity but pinching the purse strings has consequences and can alter behavior.

All of the above needs to be voted on and vetted by a thorough look at non-traditional options but done by the pilots and not management. The unionistas will scream this is against all acceptable standards of union ethics....either you want to do something to affect change or one doesn't, it is pretty simple.

We either police our own or we can continue to complain about our bad actors or pro stands with no teeth but it is the pilots and not management who can fix the problem without lawyers getting involved.

The ultimate death penalty for a bad actor who completely fails to see the light is voting the idiot off the island....no more union representation, protection "see you" is the proper reply (not firing, unions don't hire or fire) and give permission to the company to have him/her continue to fly but the individual is now an "indenpedent contractor"....the company can do with the individual what they wish to do....the union doesn't cover "contract employees"....even this wage would be agreed upon by the union/association and the company....pls don't tell me the company will want to grow this group of "B" scale pilots since they are paid less? No flt ops would want to see anyone on this list and probably wouldn't keep them very long anyway.

Only pilots on the seniority list and an approved "independent contractor" list get to fly the company's airplanes....chances are, they wouldn't stay on that list very long before the company found them to be too much of a risk.

The umbrella protection of the union should be all until one proves beyond any reasonable doubt they can't or won't play well together....at that point the pilot has stretched the rubber band as far as it needs to be stretched IMHO.....

sorry for thread creep but when I hear pro stands has no teeth it is because pilots don't want to take the step to give it any. This is all open for debate obviously with many points to ponder; it is a meaningful attempt to solve a problem that has never been addressed adequately but continuing to do what is currently being done is not fixing the problem.

back to lurking and sitting reserve...only used on last day with 2 off days....cheers

 

[waveflyer]

Good ideas chase.

What "teeth" do other airline'sPS's have?

 

[redflyer65]

So did the guy actually get fired?

 

[Fubijaakr]

Ok you need to stop posting stuff I agree with


PS have a good thanksgiving

Sorry, didn't mean to make you uncomfortable. Hope you've got time off with your family/friends for the holiday...enjoy!

 

[Fubijaakr]

Good ideas chase.

What "teeth" do other airline'sPS's have?

Well, NO ProStan committee has real "teeth", however, a properly run program can rein in bad actors before Company disciplinary action has to get involved.

If you have a respected committee like ours, the Company will even refer a problem to them in order to avoid having to officially discipline a pilot. If the behavior continues beyond that, then the discipline system is invoked.

Now, in your case (apparently) your committee is so backwards, the average rank and file pilot prefers to refer problems directly to the BCP simply because they're not getting any satisfaction from ProStans.

 

[Ty Webb]

Good ideas chase.

Yup. Very reasonable, and would be effective. Even the most oblivious buffoon would feel the consequences in his wallet, in his bidding, and with the threat of Company discipline.

 

[chase]

Well, NO ProStan committee has real "teeth", however, a properly run program can rein in bad actors before Company disciplinary action has to get involved.

If you have a respected committee like ours, the Company will even refer a problem to them in order to avoid having to officially discipline a pilot. If the behavior continues beyond that, then the discipline system is invoked.

Now, in your case (apparently) your committee is so backwards, the average rank and file pilot prefers to refer problems directly to the BCP simply because they're not getting any satisfaction from ProStans.

Fubi,

I don't know what type of program your airline has but the following would surprise me if it isn't true:

1. Isolated incidents do get fixed by our Pro Stands and when necessary our CPs and I assume yours also.

2. The "true bad actors", less than 1%, know precisely where the line is and what they can get away with and when the union "must" represent them.

3. A "bad actor" is under no pressure/incentive to respond, comply with or engage with pro stds if they don't wish to. Again, this isn't their first rodeo and play the system like tournament level players.

4. Some wear their reputation as being a pain as a "badge of honor"...why? Because they can hold pro stds off at arms length while smiling politely in the CP's office saying, "I didn't violate the FOM, I flew the airplane within limits and my social skills suck...you can't fire me fro that?"....and so they walk.

While "hostile work environment" gives companies greater leeway than in the past, unions must still defend the bad actors. Who represents the FO (or CA) when he complains? Pro stands but again who have the leverage? The bad actor since he hasn't violated any directives but simply violated commonly acceptable modes of behavior.

Get the company out of the mix and let the associations work the issue internally with tools that can affect change. After the first couple of bad actors are marched through the gauntlet, other trouble children will not want to be dragged through the consequences or process.

Make it painful enough and people change behavior....we have programs for those with drug and alcohol problems and they are successful ...why? Because folks are motivated to not run afoul and suffer the pain/consequences....the same can be done for bad actors toward our own if we as pilots are willing to tackle the issue as group instead of leaving it to management.

 

[slaquer5]

Fubi,



4. Some wear their reputation as being a pain as a "badge of honor"...why? Because they can hold pro stds off at arms length while smiling politely in the CP's office saying, "I didn't violate the FOM, I flew the airplane within limits and my social skills suck...you can't fire me fro that?"....and so they walk.

While "hostile work environment" gives companies greater leeway than in the past, unions must still defend the bad actors. Who represents the FO (or CA) when he complains? Pro stands but again who have the leverage? The bad actor since he hasn't violated any directives but simply violated commonly acceptable modes of behavior.

.

Once again you have no clue what you are talking about. If the company or FAA knew what they where doing they would no longer have a job. The pilots that fly with them take it to P/S which in turn can not do a dammm thing. It is cray how some on here think you are in the know or know what your talking about. i do think your heart is in the right place, but you do not have a clue my brother.

 

[chase]

Slaquer5,

My apologies if my comments offend you or come off as knowing more than you...I'm not a pro stds guy nor have I been one.

I have spoken a lot to CPs, union reps, pro stds persons at SWA and other airlines about the topic. I have also seen the scenario I described up close and in person with a CA I flew when years ago.

I have heard similar stories told me as an FO and after I became a CA.

If you believe my statements are without evidence, no worries...they are based upon interviews with management, union personnnel and many pilots who have confirmed the same type of experience I encountered.

The frustration felt by some within pro stds and their eventual departure is partially fueled by the bad actors walking the line and feeling ineffective in making changes.

We obviously have different experiences and thus different opinions.

Pls provide if you wish your remedy for correcting bad actors? Thanks in advance for your reply.

 

[slaquer5]

Slaquer5,

My apologies if my comments offend you or come off as knowing more than you...I'm not a pro stds guy nor have I been one.

I have spoken a lot to CPs, union reps, pro stds persons at SWA and other airlines about the topic. I have also seen the scenario I described up close and in person with a CA I flew when years ago.

I have heard similar stories told me as an FO and after I became a CA.

If you believe my statements are without evidence, no worries...they are based upon interviews with management, union personnnel and many pilots who have confirmed the same type of experience I encountered.

The frustration felt by some within pro stds and their eventual departure is partially fueled by the bad actors walking the line and feeling ineffective in making changes.

We obviously have different experiences and thus different opinions.

Pls provide if you wish your remedy for correcting bad actors? Thanks in advance for your reply.

I am not going to rattle off on a pubic forum , what I am talking about. I don't care who you have talked to, you are wrong. Just like You saying someone could get fired for letting a family member go on cwa . If you want to bring this to pprure I will engage. You are very wrong and confused if you think the ones that PS calls on a regular basis, fly the aircraft safe and know the FOM. I know for a fact the CP do not tell you that.

Your heart is in the right place, but please do not try to defend these pilots. It is a lot like ACLU defending child molesters rights.

 

[Dan Roman]

Some good points being brought up here, let me throw this out there.

1) ProStan is supposed to be the safe haven were a pilot can go if he is having a problem with a fellow crewmember. It's supposed to be a place were he can get resolution without the worry of getting in trouble. For this reason, if ProStan is seen as a disciplinary committee, pilot's will be less likely to come to them with a problem.
ProStan should be the safe haven to work out a problem confidentially, it is up to management to do the disciplining if ProStan cannot get a resolution.
For this reason, talk of them "having teeth" may sound good, but how do you do it?
Chase, you did bring up some good ideas, but again, if ProStan is seen as too much of a disciplinarian people will avoid them when they have a problem. What then? As has been pointed out, they really don't have the power to do anything. Only management can, ProStan can only give them a warning, so to speak, it's up to management to deal with the bad actors if they don't want to heed the advice of ProStan.

1) It's not unheard of for someone to complain to ProStan about someone, but when they don't get the resolution they want, they blame ProStan. When in reality they may very well be part of the problem. It often takes two "bad actors" to create a problem.


Yes, I am involved with ProStan work and am putting this out there to hear what people think and to get ideas.

Thanks