Live Smartpref overated?

[www.]

Yes, both. If the number one guy bids specific trips and the number two guy bids the exact same specific trips, the number two guy will not get them. Hence, unless you are number one, neither system guarantees that you will get what you bid for.

Uh, I think our guys know that. That is what seniority is all about.

 

[No Delay]

Nevets, thanks for the response.

I think the only point I would add...like others have said...the live results are just too misleading and is really worthless until all bids are in. I think the best way to know what you can hold comes after a couple of months bidding. Soon you know pretty much what to expect.

Just seems like a lot of risk, uncertainty, and animosity for very little gain. The only thing that even remotely interest me is knowing my schedule earlier. But that's not so important to me to stop the show.

 

[Nevets]

Nevets, thanks for the response.

I think the only point I would add...like others have said...the live results are just too misleading and is really worthless until all bids are in. I think the best way to know what you can hold comes after a couple of months bidding. Soon you know pretty much what to expect.

Just seems like a lot of risk, uncertainty, and animosity for very little gain. The only thing that even remotely interest me is knowing my schedule earlier. But that's not so important to me to stop the show.

The live bidding is not so much about what trips you are going to get. It's about knowing within a few minutes of changing bidding strategy on what your seniority may get. For example, if you were a commuter, you may want commutable four day trips that start on Tuesday. So you set up your bid and find out right away that either you are not senior enough for that and or that that may be a day that is being unstacked. So you decide that having commutable days is more important than having weekends off so you change your bid and see what that looks like. Rinse and repeat as many times as you would like OR just do it like you do with flight line now, look at it a couple times or none and leave it alone and wait to see what your final line award is. Another example is reserve protect and many more examples as their are different bidding strategies. Wondering of you can hold a particular thing, try it. It'll give you a rough idea if you could or not. You can even see who has already changed their standing bid to see how many people above your seniority have already placed an active bid. Obviously, the higher the seniority, the more confidence you will have in the live bidding. Also, you can set your back up trips. For example, you set your bid and like the tentative result. You can then order backup trips for each trip you currently have just in case someone senior takes it.

In the end, our MEC likes this better than anything else because its the type of system that will most likely ensure that we maintain our current QOL, especially when you consider that flight line will not survive its current iteration and the best thing about it, vacation low, the company wants gone. It's going to take a lot of negotiating capital, that's not needed as much with smartpref, just to keep it as is. That's capital that can be used to maintain other aspects of our contract, that quite frankly would be great increases to your QOL, like our B fund, 401k matching, vacation and sick time accrual, health benefits, pay rates, all things they are targeting. To us, that battle to improve work rules to make flight line maintain our QOL will only take away from defending the other cornerstones of our contract. That to me seems to be a lot of risk, uncertainty, and animosity to keep some PBS vendor when another one can do the same job.

 

[Nevets]

And why is this thread in the General Aviation section? Is someone trying to hide it?

 

[Pilot Hopeful]

That's capital that can be used to maintain other aspects of our contract, that quite frankly would be great increases to your QOL, like our B fund, 401k matching, vacation and sick time accrual, health benefits, pay rates, all things they are targeting.

These are all things that everyone would like to see improved; QOL is not limited to scheduling.

That to me seems to be a lot of risk, uncertainty, and animosity to keep some PBS vendor when another one can do the same job.

This is where we probably disagree. For the lower seniority "constrained" pilots that face the possibility of uncertain globalized assignments every month, it seems that scheduling QOL could incur a significant hit. In the minds of many Prefbid supporters, trading a seniority-based award engine for one that invokes globablization over a large part of the pilot population does not seem like a one-for-one exchange.

You can then order backup trips for each trip you currently have just in case someone senior takes it.

Does this apply to all pilots or only to those not in the constrained group? Under Prefbid, every pilot can set "backup" trips.

Flight line globalizes in a different way. It may honor your seniority but it certainly changes everyone's lines subjectively by humans in order to come to a viable solution. The difference with smartpref is that it only does it for the constrained group and not everyone like flight line. They both use neutral trips to construct lines if it can't build one with the specific ones you bid.

This is what I understand globlization to be: When globilization is in effect, it is possible for pairings that a senior pilot has ranked highly to go to a more junior pilot (and in turn, to receive lower priority, less desirable trips). Flight line does not globalize. If a senior pilot bids specific pairings, those pairing are not awarded to a more junior pilot at the whims of union or company subjectivity. The changes introduced "subjectively" do not override specific pilot preferences. The system does not bypass higher preferences for lower ones to make a viable solution. Seniority is preserved.

How do you know if the last solution had a better or worse line than the original solution? Is there an audit trail for every single line that was considered? If not, why not?

These questions do not make sense under Prefbid---nor do the concepts of a better or worse line. But suppose they did. If a pilot could consider one solution run "better" or "worse" than another, then that pilot has not been specific enough in designating desirable pairing. Creating specific, detailed preferences removes any sort of variability that any "subjective," external influence could play---regardless of seniority.

Extended Prefbid scenario:
Pilot wants 3-day trips.
Pilot submits only one preference: 3-day trips.

Let's suppose that only two iterations are considered by the company.
Solution 1: Pilot receives six 3-day trips, each credited at 16 hours.
Solution 2: Pilot receives five 3-day trips, each credited at 18 hours.

Which solution is "better"? Maybe the pilot would prefer Solution 1 because the credit hours are higher; maybe the pilot prefers Solution 2 because it offers more days off.

Let's suppose the pilot "prefers" Solution 2 but that the final award is Solution 1; the system tries to assign lower-credit trips first. Solution 1 does not conflict or globalize the pilot: The pilot specified only 3-day trips, and the pilot receives 3-day trips. In other words, the pilot was not specific enough when submitting preferences.

Since Solution 1 and Solution 2 were possible outcomes for our pilot, how could the pilot receive the "more desirable" solution? Simply improve preference criteria or add additional preferences or both. A better preference submission would be this: 3-day trips, credit > 17 hours. Now, even if the system tried to award lower-credit pairings first, the pilot would still receive pairings crediting more than 17 hours and drive the award to Solution 2.

In fact, even if the company ran the same two iterations, both should be identical for the pilot: Because the pilot is senior enough to hold the 18-hour, 3-day trips, the system will not be able to assign lower-credit pairings.

 

[Nevets]

These are all things that everyone would like to see improved; QOL is not limited to scheduling.

Yes, but you ignore the other part of my post you didn't quote here. We would like to keep these things we already have in our contract. Trying to keep vacation low AND improving other rules to make flight line at least as good to keep our side's QOL is just not going to happen. We will not be able to keep vacation low, improve scheduling/PBS work rules, keep our B fund, keep our higher 401k matching, keep our higher vacation accrual, keep our higher sick time accrual, keep our health benefits at the current premium ratios, get fair increases in pay rates, and whatever other work rule tweaks that we would like to have.

This is where we probably disagree. For the lower seniority "constrained" pilots that face the possibility of uncertain globalized assignments every month, it seems that scheduling QOL could incur a significant hit. In the minds of many Prefbid supporters, trading a seniority-based award engine for one that invokes globablization over a large part of the pilot population does not seem like a one-for-one exchange.

But it's not uncertain! You know right away if you are in the constrained group. You know right away what your bid results may look like. You know right away what days are being unstacked. You know this all before the lines are final. In prefbid, everyone's lines gets massaged after bidding closes and blind to the line pilot. In smartpref, only the constrained group is globalizes and they see it before the lines are final and can adjust bidding strategies accordingly. The senior people are not constrained and get exactly waht their seniority can hold and the junior people are in the constrained group and may get unstacked. It's still seniority driven but its just different. In flight line EVERYONE gets their lines massaged and you will never know if the final subjective solution was the best for you.

Does this apply to all pilots or only to those not in the constrained group? Under Prefbid, every pilot can set "backup" trips.

For all pilots not in the constrained group. I believe they are working to get the constrained group to be able to do this as well. But what I'm talking about is when it shows you your possible line, it also shows you a list of all the other pairings that you had to choose from. It lists them in on order that meets your criteria so you can move them up or down on the list so that if someone senior to you takes one or more of your tentative pairings, you know exactly which other pairings will replace each of the ones that may be taken.

This is what I understand globlization to be: When globilization is in effect, it is possible for pairings that a senior pilot has ranked highly to go to a more junior pilot (and in turn, to receive lower priority, less desirable trips). Flight line does not globalize. If a senior pilot bids specific pairings, those pairing are not awarded to a more junior pilot at the whims of union or company subjectivity. The changes introduced "subjectively" do not override specific pilot preferences. The system does not bypass higher preferences for lower ones to make a viable solution. Seniority is preserved.

Like I've said before, it uses neutral trips just as flight line does when people are subjectively massaging them. But yes, you may be unstacked. And what I mean about subjectivity is that not every pilot can conceive of every single iteration of their possible line that may be part of the dozens of multiple solutions the PWG may come up with. There is no way to bid with multiple bid sheets in a way that will always give you the best line for you in every single solution that the PWG comes up with. You never get to see them and the PWG decides what is best for EVERYONE COLLECTIVELY, not what is best for the number 1 bidder and second best for the number 2 bidder and etc etc. This is what I mean any time I say that it socializes. In smartpref, only the constrained group is subject to globalization.

These questions do not make sense under Prefbid---nor do the concepts of a better or worse line. But suppose they did. If a pilot could consider one solution run "better" or "worse" than another, then that pilot has not been specific enough in designating desirable pairing. Creating specific, detailed preferences removes any sort of variability that any "subjective," external influence could play---regardless of seniority.

Extended Prefbid scenario:
Pilot wants 3-day trips.
Pilot submits only one preference: 3-day trips.

Let's suppose that only two iterations are considered by the company.
Solution 1: Pilot receives six 3-day trips, each credited at 16 hours.
Solution 2: Pilot receives five 3-day trips, each credited at 18 hours.

Which solution is "better"? Maybe the pilot would prefer Solution 1 because the credit hours are higher; maybe the pilot prefers Solution 2 because it offers more days off.

Let's suppose the pilot "prefers" Solution 2 but that the final award is Solution 1; the system tries to assign lower-credit trips first. Solution 1 does not conflict or globalize the pilot: The pilot specified only 3-day trips, and the pilot receives 3-day trips. In other words, the pilot was not specific enough when submitting preferences.

Since Solution 1 and Solution 2 were possible outcomes for our pilot, how could the pilot receive the "more desirable" solution? Simply improve preference criteria or add additional preferences or both. A better preference submission would be this: 3-day trips, credit > 17 hours. Now, even if the system tried to award lower-credit pairings first, the pilot would still receive pairings crediting more than 17 hours and drive the award to Solution 2.

In fact, even if the company ran the same two iterations, both should be identical for the pilot: Because the pilot is senior enough to hold the 18-hour, 3-day trips, the system will not be able to assign lower-credit pairings.

First, lets get this straight. You can have two lines with six 3 day trips worth 16 hours each and still have one you feel is better than the other. You will never know it though because you never see the dozens of different solutions and the final one that the PWG subjectively picks for all your pilots. With smartpref, you see if you are senior enough to hold the higher credit ones and the resulting extra day off. You see which other 3 day pairings are available and you can select your backups. It'll show you right away of you screwed up your bid, in your example by not being specific enough. You get as many tries as you want and not just 12-36 (if you count the two prelims and the final one the PWG picks for everyone). With smartpref you can easily have that many in one bid window or you can choose to only have one final award like in flight line.

 

[labbats]

Not to be a paranoid person but you should ask yourselves why the company wants this so badly. It isn't to help the pilot group I can assure you.

 

[Nevets]

Not to be a paranoid person but you should ask yourselves why the company wants this so badly. It isn't to help the pilot group I can assure you.

It's to get a system that actually comes up with a viable solution without requiring half a dozen people being paid to manually globalize/socialize/massage the unsatisfactory outcome.