More planes for ExpressJet

[Nevets]

Thanks for the additional information, but you have posted on numerous occasions that (paraphrasing) "PrefBid was an improvement over ASA line bidding but won't work with XJT work rules." If your true position was more open then I apologize, but those posts made you seem just as close-minded as you accuse my reps of being.

Those two statements are not mutually exclusive.

Agreed. They are doing it because the United contract allows larger regional aircraft, the CPA provides the company with rights to some of that flying if 50-seaters are being replaced, and they can't wait forever for rates to be established by the JCBA. The L-ASA reps claim they were open to some of the conflict resolutions you mentioned but L-XJT insisted on terms/conditions they found unacceptable. Without specifics, which probably shouldn't be discussed on an open forum, I won't form an opinion on that.

I will say that I see potential problems with a dual track or a third party making the decision for us. I'd rather see a solution that comes from our pilots, such as a committee of new volunteers with fresh perspectives who can get as in depth with each system as required. Maybe there are arguments or options the current team hasn't considered. If we have any furloughed L-XJT pilots who were at ASA and held a line, and who are now using SmartPref for relief lines back at XJT, I'd be very curious to hear their initial impressions.

Once the company has a rates and a training program for large CRJs on the LXJT side for these supposed UAX aircraft, you think they would just stop there if the ASA MEC keeps up their "pref bid for everyone or no merger" stance? I wouldn't tempt fate, especially since this management has pulled aircraft shenanigans in your last contract negotiations.

 

[79%N1]

Ok, for argument sake, let's say I agree with you. The problem is that your MEC taken options off the table. They have turned down every single idea to decide which system is better: dual tracks, super committees, arbitration, etc. They don't have an open mind. Their email yesterday prices they didn't even research smartpref enough that it doesn't work off of bid sheets. They didn't even look deep enough to realize there are more ways than the prefbid way of bidding.



There is a reason why management is moving forward and negotiating rates for larger aircraft on the ERJ side. It has nothing to do with the XJT MEC moving their position towards smartpref.




At least we agree on something but this has been true since day one.

Excuse my ignorance.

Could you please indicate to me which conditions of flightline's prefbid do not or would not work for the LXJT group (under proper work rules), and how/why the smartpref works better.

Lets get to the bottom of this with facts so many of us can decide for ourselves.

 

[enuffalready]

Excuse my ignorance.

Could you please indicate to me which conditions of flightline's prefbid do not or would not work for the LXJT group (under proper work rules), and how/why the smartpref works better.

Lets get to the bottom of this with facts so many of us can decide for ourselves.

---Xjet guys will win this .... company wants smartpref... Xjt wants smartpref. we are going to be stuck with that turd... ..and what makes is really really really bad is that we will be stuck with it for duration of new contract!

 

[drinksonme]

---Xjet guys will win this ... Xjt wants smartpref.

And here is the philosophy that is the problem. Win what? This is not a competition for trophy and rings. For some reason I have felt this attitude from ASA folks, like it is a competition and the winner gets the spoils. That is a cultural issue and I do not think the pilot group at ASA came up with on their own. Someone drove that idea....who? And for the record XJT has already lost if we want a PBS system. Our pilots overwhelming are against it, but the union is tasked with protecting us. If based on all the info they have, and protecting LXJT pilots is number 1, then they have lost our first battle to keep line bidding to protect us. I hope that is the case. Essentially, they may be laying on their sword as a union rep to push this on us. What do they have to gain. Yet on the LASA side, we are starting to see a "militant" stance with the ultimatum on PBS. Is that best for the pilot group? Or is best for the union reps first then the pilot group? Personally, it as if the ASA MEC is tactically trying to exert control to not lose control. That is not a good thing for the pilots of either company and not in the best interest of the group. From what I, an XJT pilot, have heard from my friends, yes pilot friends at ASA, about your union leadership is not encouraging. A tight group of good old boys who want to keep their club and will do anything to do it.....even fighting a thorough look at, not an actual, change. Why, because it is perceived threat of a lose....bring it back to a winning vs. losing no winner battle.

 

[enuffalready]

And here is the philosophy that is the problem. Win what? This is not a competition for trophy and rings. For some reason I have felt this attitude from ASA folks, like it is a competition and the winner gets the spoils. That is a cultural issue and I do not think the pilot group at ASA came up with on their own. Someone drove that idea....who? And for the record XJT has already lost if we want a PBS system. Our pilots overwhelming are against it, but the union is tasked with protecting us. If based on all the info they have, and protecting LXJT pilots is number 1, then they have lost our first battle to keep line bidding to protect us. I hope that is the case. Essentially, they may be laying on their sword as a union rep to push this on us. What do they have to gain. Yet on the LASA side, we are starting to see a "militant" stance with the ultimatum on PBS. Is that best for the pilot group? Or is best for the union reps first then the pilot group? Personally, it as if the ASA MEC is tactically trying to exert control to not lose control. That is not a good thing for the pilots of either company and not in the best interest of the group. From what I, an XJT pilot, have heard from my friends, yes pilot friends at ASA, about your union leadership is not encouraging. A tight group of good old boys who want to keep their club and will do anything to do it.....even fighting a thorough look at, not an actual, change. Why, because it is perceived threat of a lose....bring it back to a winning vs. losing no winner battle.

yes, its a win for you retards because you TURDS introduced a system that is WORSE than what we have... we will be STUCK with said turd. not only will we be stuck with this turd... but rather than a LOA we will be stuck with turd for duration of contract. congrats XJET mec. Great Work! You win...

Maybe I am looking at this all wrong. I should be excited. I cant wait for the new system that is all the rage with every airline its currently used.

 

[IFLYASA]

And here is the philosophy that is the problem. Win what? This is not a competition for trophy and rings. For some reason I have felt this attitude from ASA folks, like it is a competition and the winner gets the spoils. That is a cultural issue and I do not think the pilot group at ASA came up with on their own. Someone drove that idea....who? And for the record XJT has already lost if we want a PBS system. Our pilots overwhelming are against it, but the union is tasked with protecting us. If based on all the info they have, and protecting LXJT pilots is number 1, then they have lost our first battle to keep line bidding to protect us. I hope that is the case. Essentially, they may be laying on their sword as a union rep to push this on us. What do they have to gain. Yet on the LASA side, we are starting to see a "militant" stance with the ultimatum on PBS. Is that best for the pilot group? Or is best for the union reps first then the pilot group? Personally, it as if the ASA MEC is tactically trying to exert control to not lose control. That is not a good thing for the pilots of either company and not in the best interest of the group. From what I, an XJT pilot, have heard from my friends, yes pilot friends at ASA, about your union leadership is not encouraging. A tight group of good old boys who want to keep their club and will do anything to do it.....even fighting a thorough look at, not an actual, change. Why, because it is perceived threat of a lose....bring it back to a winning vs. losing no winner battle.

Here's the deal. LXJET has had both "line bidding", and "PBS", XJET has had only line bidding. I was just like you. Anti PBS. I voted no. I loved my line bidding. Taking it from a pilot who wants the best of his schedule/pay, I could not do line bidding anymore. PBS is way more flexible, choosing specific days, duty in/out times, overnights, etc... So much more to chose from.

My question is how can you bash PBS if you have never used it? Wouldn't you trust someone who has dealt with both? Especially from me ( like a Xjet'er, ) who didn't want it, but saw the best of both worlds, and PBS hands down takes it. We are all on the same team. If you are a commuter, PBS is a dream, even though I'm not.

If you used it, you would know where I am coming from. I'm just saying.

 

[Nevets]

yes, its a win for you retards because you TURDS introduced a system that is WORSE than what we have... we will be STUCK with said turd. not only will we be stuck with this turd... but rather than a LOA we will be stuck with turd for duration of contract. congrats XJET mec. Great Work! You win...

Maybe I am looking at this all wrong. I should be excited. I cant wait for the new system that is all the rage with every airline its currently used.

Who says it worse? Your MEC has not even run smartpref with real pairings and real work rules. So how does anybody over there know for sure? And the best way to figure it out in real life, using dual tracks, was turned down by your MEC because of their pref bid or no merger stance. How does any of that help you?

 

[Nevets]

Here's the deal. LXJET has had both "line bidding", and "PBS", XJET has had only line bidding. I was just like you. Anti PBS. I voted no. I loved my line bidding. Taking it from a pilot who wants the best of his schedule/pay, I could not do line bidding anymore. PBS is way more flexible, choosing specific days, duty in/out times, overnights, etc... So much more to chose from.

My question is how can you bash PBS if you have never used it? Wouldn't you trust someone who has dealt with both? Especially from me ( like a Xjet'er, ) who didn't want it, but saw the best of both worlds, and PBS hands down takes it. We are all on the same team. If you are a commuter, PBS is a dream, even though I'm not.

If you used it, you would know where I am coming from. I'm just saying.

It has already been used and is going to continue to be used on the LXJT side. But I can say the same thing as you, how can you bash smartpref if you have never used it? How do you know that you won't like smartpref more than pref bid? For all you know the same thing can happen with smartpref as happened when you went from line bidding to pref bid.

 

[IFLYASA]

It has already been used and is going to continue to be used on the LXJT side. But I can say the same thing as you, how can you bash smartpref if you have never used it? How do you know that you won't like smartpref more than pref bid? For all you know the same thing can happen with smartpref as happened when you went from line bidding to pref bid.

No I cannot say. I just hope whatever the result is, it's the best possible.

 

[centralpilot]

yes, its a win for you retards because you TURDS introduced a system that is WORSE than what we have... we will be STUCK with said turd. not only will we be stuck with this turd... but rather than a LOA we will be stuck with turd for duration of contract. congrats XJET mec. Great Work! You win...

Is it impossible to have a rational discussion on here without resorting to name-calling? There is a good point in there that is discredited by your childish delivery.

 

[79%N1]

Hey.....nobody will answer me! Why doesnt prefbid work for LXJT under the same work rules that smarter would have?????

At least if smartpref is a turn it's on Mcpickle. He'll have to live with that.

 

[ASAFOE120]

Why can we not make it where the ERJ side uses SmartPref and the CRJ side continues with Flightline? Then, when the company is merged, SLI is complete, and fences come down, if you bid over to that side start using that particular bidding system.

Should that not satisfy everyone? Except maybe mgt which has to foot the bill for both systems.

 

[Oakum_Boy]

a 15 year ASA pilot and now some thugs from Houston are going to tell us what to do. Guess we're in for a showdown. The número uno can't select he pairings he wants because they would 'work better' for a guy who's been here five years. That's how this is going down. I really, really wish Skywest would have let XJet be gone

 

[mckpickle]

Hey.....nobody will answer me! Why doesnt prefbid work for LXJT under the same work rules that smarter would have?????

At least if smartpref is a turn it's on Mcpickle. He'll have to live with that.

I hope this helps.

Vendor: Flightline (a subsidiary of Sabre Airline Solutions)
Program: PrefBid (A product of Flightline)
Currently in use at: ASA, Republic, GoJet, Virgin America, and AirTran
Source of Research:
· Meeting with the Flightline development team
· Discussions and interactions with the ASA PWG
· In-depth evaluation of program using ExpressJet schedule and pairing data
Basic Description:
Flightline is a non-globalized system. Pilots input their preferences, and the person who is running the builder can sort pairings within those preferences to create better results for the entire solution. Because the system is non-globalized and considers only each pilot individually, fast run times can allow many runs to be done with different sorting to obtain the best possible results.
Analysis:
Flightline has a number of issues that would make it difficult to implement for the pilots of ExpressJet. Some of those issues are:
· Inability to create viable solution in challenging months
· Necessity to “game the system” to maximize days off
· Pre-assigned events result in “lucky lineholders/unlucky reserves”
· Excessive amount of time, resources, and manual work to complete bid runs by both the union and the company
Explanation:
A dichotomy exists in our pilot group; there are some pilots that want the maximum time off possible (including those with vacation), and those who want or need to maximize their hours. In addition, because there is such a wide variety in the pairings at the regional level (4 days ranging from 28 hours to 10 hours of credit, etc.) it can be difficult to build schedules conforming to a narrow credit window. Therefore it is necessary for the PBS to have a wide range of acceptable credit times. The ASA pilot group has negotiated that the acceptable credit window will be no less than 30 hours. The use of the “vacation low” function further expands the bottom of the credit window.
The wide credit window, coupled with the non-globalization creates a difficult problem. Because the system only looks at each bidder individually and not the overall solution, there is no way to make adjustments in the middle of the seniority list during a bid run; crew members at all seniority levels receive equal treatment. In a high flying month, this means that rather than senior bidders having the option to fly a lower time schedule, everyone is forced into a high credit line except those with vacation. The 30 hour credit window is meaningless when the bottom of the window is set at 90 hours. The system as implemented at ASA preserves time off for vacation, at everyone else’s expense.
Another undesirable aspect of the Flightline system is the need to “Game the System” to get extra days off. The Flightline system is fundamentally a pairing sorter, and at the risk of oversimplifying, assumes that pilots want to work. There is no way for a pilot to tell the Flightline system that they would like no less than 15 days off. They would instead have to bid only the pairings that when combined will give 15 days off. The pilot must foresee not only how those pairings will combine, but also what will be available at their seniority to have success. This problem is particularly accentuated for bidders seeking day trips, and even more so during vacation months. This also results in additional days off being awarded not in seniority order, but by those who “gamed the system” best.
Additional seniority issues exist within the Flightline system. As the program approaches the junior lineholders, there are fewer trips to work with. At times, because of a vacation, training event, or other leave, it will be impossible to combine those trips and “pre-assigned credits” into a legal line, so that bidder will be forced into reserve. Conversely, a bidder with the same event at a different time during the month may be awarded a line, even though numerous senior bidders were forced to reserve. This creates the concept of “lucky lineholders/unlucky reserves”, which directly violates seniority.
Finally, one of the aspects that Sabre touts in the Flightline product is that fast run times allow the company and the union to be able to rerun the bid to get better results. In practice, however, run times have been long enough that multiple people have been using multiple computers in an attempt to create additional bid runs before lines are due to be awarded. The ASA PWG has reported, and this committee has observed some run times in excess of 7 hours, severely limiting the opportunity to create additional bid runs.
Additionally, the committee believes the rebuild process is fundamentally flawed. In between bid runs, nothing changes. There is the same flying, the same number of pilots, the same pilot requests. When you put all of those variables together, there is a single solution which best meets as many of those requests as possible. The Flightline process counts on the company or the union trying to find that ideal solution. In each bid run, some requests are better met than others. The committee’s preference would be to use an award logic that best meets as many requests as possible, a single optimum solution instead of one that meets the goals of the person running the software.
The software, logic, and seniority issues inherent with the Flightline PBS are not likely to be surmountable. Although the Flightline development team worked with the ASA PWG to create a system that worked for their pilots and contained significant improvements over their previous scheduling arrangement, the committee does not feel that it would be possible to repeat those gains or even maintain the current quality of life for the ExpressJet pilot group with this software.

 

[No Delay]

What is it about smartperf that they like so much? Are they thinking it will do something better?

PBS is just a delivery agent. Wish we could spend more time and energy into improving schedules and qol rather than spend all this time trying to create a new system. It would be different if everyone was unhappy with what we have. But that doesn't seem to be the case. I think most people are happy with it.

What function of smartperf is so important to them. If it will do something better, I want to know.