Major Airlines NOT Using PBS?

[Chest Rockwell]

OK let me clarify, 1 weeks vacation I work 3 to 4 days for the month 2 weeks vacation in one month I don't work at all and get paid for the full month. Can you do that with PBS? NO.

The 10% number is very accurate. Gary Kelly would be very proud of you

Actually you are incorrect. SWA could have PBS with the same vacation overlap rules that are currently in place.

You also fail to mention that to drop multiple trips you have to bid weekend flying.

 

[Benjamin Dover]

Well, considering I have experience with BOTH of the topics of your smarmy comments, you're wrong.

I experienced the best iteration of PBS and pre-built schedules and it was a wash for my QOL. I was both junior and senior during that time. PBS gave more options for having different days off but paper bidding didn't f#@k me over because some obscure setting generated a bazillion points awarding me 36 hour Scranton layovers 10 times that month.

I also went from a full FMS A/T and VNAV aircraft to a DC-9 ( a REAL DC-9 not an -80 that people call a "DC-9" ) and it was a difficult transition. The magenta line and green arc are seductive.

But maybe I'm just not the aviator you are...

TC

Since I'm not a smart man (nor ace of the base aviator either - but thanks for the props) I'm not really sure what "smarmy" means, but I'm guessing it's not a compliment

Two simple PBS concepts for you:

- I know the "all PBS sux" guys claim bs, but not all PBS created equal. Varies considerably at each company.

- Garbage in, garbage out. If you wound up with ten crappy layovers, then you probably f$#ked up your bid. Or maybe you couldn't download, sort and bid specific trips with your program?? My experience was guys were geranerally happy as long as they put in realistic constraints. Guys that hated it were often dumbasses with their PBS "wish list". One of my buds was bottom 25% and was always pissed at his crappy line he got. He showed his PBS constraints one day - all mid-week, good paying trips. Didn't bid any weekend trips. So, he got weekend lines with crappy trips. He never quite got it that if he was going to fly weekends anyway, might as well have some choice in trips, rather just leave it up to program's logic in putting trips on his line. Other guys junior to him probably had better lines as a result.

And "smarmy" topic #2, I have 2500 hrs in "real" DC-9s and I also have gone back and forth between glass/full up automation and steam gauges in my career. One or the other type of cockpit does not make one or the other pilot a better "stick" was my point - smarmy as it may seem I guess. But, there were plenty of "just say no" to automation guys at SWA when I got there but they had never used it. Just like PBS.

 

[slaquer5]

Actually you are incorrect. SWA could have PBS with the same vacation overlap rules that are currently in place.

You also fail to mention that to drop multiple trips you have to bid weekend flying.

true, now take off your pilot cap and put on your CFO hat. You get paid 26.25 for vacation. That is all you deserve. There is no way The company is going to bring in PBS and let you work it as so you can get 55 trips for one week vacation. In the eyes of the CFO anything over 26.25 is over what the contract says you should be paid. I do like the way you think I just know that they are thinking on the other side of the fence.

 

[Chest Rockwell]

true, now take off your pilot cap and put on your CFO hat. You get paid 26.25 for vacation. That is all you deserve. There is no way The company is going to bring in PBS and let you work it as so you can get 55 trips for one week vacation. In the eyes of the CFO anything over 26.25 is over what the contract says you should be paid. I do like the way you think I just know that they are thinking on the other side of the fence.

Herein lies the problem with the PBS discussion at SWA. Your statement is mostly emotion driven with little or no facts to support it. Your statement regarding the CFOs position may be correct, but maybe not. Saying that management will never do something without the conversation taking place is simply irresponsible. Perhaps thta would have happened elswhere/everywhere, but not here. If we had typical airline management, 200-300 of us would be on the street right now.

SWAPA has let emotion drive the conversation rather than fact and used this issue to easily stand up to/against a management desire. I don't think that PBS would achieve the cost benefit management desired with current vacation rules. I do not know the relationship between month-to-month overlap and vacation overlap potential. If SWAPA could get that vacation week to pay in the range of 35-40 trips, I think that we are in the range of a win-win. Problem is, no one even tried.

Our current vacation rules were developed when we had a 3-5 cent per ASM cost adantage over our competittion. That advantage is history and so is the growth that we enjoyed with that advantage. PBS may enable us to gain some of that efficiency or simply hold our own against competitors that are using it.

 

[slaquer5]

Herein lies the problem with the PBS discussion at SWA. Your statement is mostly emotion driven with little or no facts to support it. Your statement regarding the CFOs position may be correct, but maybe not. Saying that management will never do something without the conversation taking place is simply irresponsible. Perhaps thta would have happened elswhere/everywhere, but not here. If we had typical airline management, 200-300 of us would be on the street right now.

SWAPA has let emotion drive the conversation rather than fact and used this issue to easily stand up to/against a management desire. I don't think that PBS would achieve the cost benefit management desired with current vacation rules. I do not know the relationship between month-to-month overlap and vacation overlap potential. If SWAPA could get that vacation week to pay in the range of 35-40 trips, I think that we are in the range of a win-win. Problem is, no one even tried.

Our current vacation rules were developed when we had a 3-5 cent per ASM cost adantage over our competittion. That advantage is history and so is the growth that we enjoyed with that advantage. PBS may enable us to gain some of that efficiency or simply hold our own against competitors that are using it.

Now thats funny stuff. Yes SWAPA did try and bino (sp) said that w/ what SWA wants it would not be a good deal for us. I agree PBS would make us more efficient . It basically comes out to a 10 % concession. If you think upgrades are slow now just vote in PBS and see how long it will take..

Also agreed that if we could get 35-40 trips for one week it would be a win for most pilots. We will not get 35-40 trips for one week, that is almost double of what we get now 26.25 for one week.

I think your the one going on emotion , why dont you call swapa or better yet Bino and ask him what transpired w/ PBS. I already know talking to him first had.

 

[Chest Rockwell]

Check your facts, and math. 26.25 X 2 = 52.5.

 

[slaquer5]

Check your facts, and math. 26.25 X 2 = 52.5.

Funny now i know your not a pilot for swa . good luck in your push to get it passed, you might want to learn more about what swapa did .

 

[Chest Rockwell]

Slaq,

Emotion. You should attack the message rather than the messenger. Otherwise you compromise your credibility.

I am not pushing for PBS. I would simply like an informed and intelligent discussion on the topic, which has never occured.

Pick up a trip with Byno or give him a call and ask specifically if vacation pay was discussed as requirement to consider PBS. If it was, great. It was not mentioned in any of the SWAPA communication (RP) regarding this issue.

 

[slaquer5]

Slaq,

Emotion. You should attack the message rather than the messenger. Otherwise you compromise your credibility.

I am not pushing for PBS. I would simply like an informed and intelligent discussion on the topic, which has never occured.

Pick up a trip with Byno or give him a call and ask specifically if vacation pay was discussed as requirement to consider PBS. If it was, great. It was not mentioned in any of the SWAPA communication (RP) regarding this issue.

It would be hard to pick up a trip w/ his as he and I are in the same seat and have been for a long while. I have had him in the JS and I do know all that was discussed .He said what we would want was no where close what the company wanted to they took it off the table. If you want more info come on pprune and ask me i will give you all the info.

 

[UpNDownGuy]

Exactly:

If you are management you want PBS.

If you are a management b!tch you want PBS, and you've got it.

If you are working under a bankruptcy contract you've got PBS.

If you think management likes you. You like PBS.

Very well put. If you have PBS, and don't understand you have it because management wants it, you are clueless.

For those that don't have it, my advice is to fight tooth and nail to keep that abortion off your property.

 

[EMBpilot]

As far as I am concerned Continental's PBS could be shoveled back into those Swedish teenage a...s that created it in the dads basement in the first place.
No wonder it was the lowest price on the market..

 

[get2flyin]

First we got rid of the pistons. Then we got rid of the props. TV screens instead of my trusty steam gauges. Side stick instead of a yoke. The final insult is PBS instead of line bidding. They're are ALL perfect examples of management tools used to screw pilots! Damn you, relentless march of technology and science!

Yeah, that's it!

 

[UpNDownGuy]

We used to have A/B plans for retirement also. Is that progress?

Can you understand that PBS has nothing to do with technology, or what kind of plane you are flying, but everything to do with the further lowering of our standard of living?