No comment on ASA PBS LOA yet?

[Quiet Flight]

You're stoned if you accept PBS in ANY form. But do what you wish.

 

[aircombat]

I guess we see it differently.

I do not see this PBS as lowering the bar, when compared to every other system and contract out there.

As far as a merger, it's not worth losing the union. If we could make it happen and keep the union, I'm all for it.

And I do feel for the furloughs, but any action which forces an overstaffed situation simply will not work. Now, if Skywest hires one pilot while we have folks on the street, that is a different animal which we should do something about.

I believe PBS will make us more competitive without being a concession. On that we clearly disagree.

I don’t know why we would have to “lose the union”. Maybe we would have to revote as a combined list. Yes there would be some risk involved for the union. I don’t think we will lose it though. For one thing if we try to force a merger I can only image that if the Skywest pilots have even a peanut sized brain they would immediately seek representation. I guess it wouldn’t have to be ALPA but it probably would be. Unfortunately that would be bad for us, in the sense of losing leverage, however the alternative is worse.

 

[Poppa Hodax]

....but they already have the ability to build the lines in such a manner, but they never have, so what makes you think PBS will inspire them to do so?

A very relevant point. The Company and Union claim that PBS is the only way to get the lines built in an efficient way. Why not just buy the software, run the program with a set of bid preferences according to the contract or whatever settings get the efficiencies desired, and offer the results up as the bid package? Why get the pilots involved at all?
Single engine taxi was "forbidden" in Atlanta until the Company figured out they were wasting a boatload of gas, and concomitantly money. Suddenly, single engine taxi is okay. Nothing matters to the Company except financial issues. If PBS were truly the only way to achieve the construction of efficient lines, they would have implemented the program already.

You rather look at someone building lines on a monthly basis for you rather than you picking which days off or cities you want to go, or not go to, and filtering the type trips or number of legs etc..?

Frankly, yes. The status quo favors the senior, a fine system with years of tradition to commend it. I understand that seniority is everything. So why replace a system that favors the senior with a system that further favors the senior? Why let the senior guys cherry pick the good stuff out?
The Company (theoretically) builds the most efficient lines they can, while honoring the FARs and the contract. They don't have a notion of what a good line is, or a bad line. It is just a line. Each line in the bid package is a Halloween grab bag: some good, and some bad. Why let the senior guys root through all the grab bags picking out all the Twix, leaving nothing but seven year old candied hearts knockoffs with lewd messages manufactured in an eastern European country that doesn't even exist anymore for the junior guys? When the Company builds the lines, at least junior guys have the hope of something tasty in the middle of the line 405 crapwich. Further, I'm not sure how PBS will help the folks stranded on reserve for the foreseeable future.

You're stoned if you accept PBS in ANY form.

I have heard this advice from many, many pilots who loathe PBS. You just can't polish a turd.
[waiting for the But We Got The Best PBS System chorus to begin its din]

 

[OCP]

Poppa Hodax,

What is the bad of having PBS? What will change for the worst for you personally if we got it?

 

[aircombat]

Poppa Hodax,

What is the bad of having PBS? What will change for the worst for you personally if we got it?

Just because you may personally benefit from PBS doesn’t necessarily make it right. Just because you didn’t have to deal with PBS when you were junior doesn’t mean you should step on your pears now that you have something to gain from it. PBS requires less pilots. That is bad for the profession as long as the rule of supply and demand still applies. Your children won’t appreciate you making it harder for them to get a job.

 

[OCP]

Just because you may personally benefit from PBS doesn’t necessarily make it right. Just because you didn’t have to deal with PBS when you were junior doesn’t mean you should step on your pears now that you have something to gain from it. PBS requires less pilots. That is bad for the profession as long as the rule of supply and demand still applies. Your children won’t appreciate you making it harder for them to get a job.

Right but to see all sides I am wanting to see what people bring up as the bad points so I can then investigate my self and see if they are accurate with what is being proposed at ASA.

 

[Tarzan]

Just because you may personally benefit from PBS doesn’t necessarily make it right. Just because you didn’t have to deal with PBS when you were junior doesn’t mean you should step on your pears now that you have something to gain from it. PBS requires less pilots. That is bad for the profession as long as the rule of supply and demand still applies. Your children won’t appreciate you making it harder for them to get a job.

Your type has been around for a long time. I wonder what you'd have been saying when the cotton gin was introduced. Point is, business looks for new ways to do thing efficiently. The union, as much as you believe otherwise, is incapable of stopping business models from changing. You either adapt and do the best you can with the cards you have or you go to the house. PBS is just another manifestation of the changing model.

I think you're being selfish because it will benefit me and you are committed to voting No. Just thinking of yourself because you think ALPA can magically get you everything you want. I do what I can but there is only so much I am willing to risk. Right now, ASA leads the contract carriers in what our contract currently has. Don't bother nit picking either. Some have things that are better but overall when measuring one to another, ours is the top. How the F*** should we squezze more blood from turnip?

Rather silly argument isn't it?

However, let's go with your argument for a second on the "children" comment. How do you propose this company keeps itself a viable option as a contract provider if they don't compete? I think my children would rather have me working now than laid off because the company was downsized dramatically.

 

[aircombat]

How do you propose this company keeps itself a viable option as a contract provider if they don't compete? I think my children would rather have me working now than laid off because the company was downsized dramatically.

There isn't that much money in this gig for the company. Some guys seem to think there will be tens of millions saved. Sorry but it ain't happening.

I’m starting to get confused here. How do you think this is going to make us more competitive if it really isn’t going to save the company that much money? And you still haven’t answered how this is going to make us cheaper than Skywest? Don’t you worry the downsizing is a coming. PBS will just provide a vessel to accelerate it.

 

[aircombat]

Your type has been around for a long time. I wonder what you'd have been saying when the cotton gin was introduced. Point is, business looks for new ways to do thing efficiently. The union, as much as you believe otherwise, is incapable of stopping business models from changing. You either adapt and do the best you can with the cards you have or you go to the house. PBS is just another manifestation of the changing model.

I do understand your argument and it is a valid one however, don't you think that comparing PBS to the industrial revolution is a slight stretch. Remember you yourself said this isn’t going to save the company that much money.

 

[buscap]

The cotton gin lead to an explosion in the slave trade, which at the time was on it's way to dying a slow death.

Very much beside the point, but the analogy was terrible and needed rebuked!!

That said, I believe PBS will make us more competitive when and if more flying becomes available. And the company's claim that it will not save money here and now is hogwash. That't them blowing smoke so we don't try to strong-arm more out of them.

I have nothing against ASA making money.

I simply do not think this LOA is a total slam on the junior pilots, who by the way will not be junior forever. As for the furloughs, the better the company does, the faster they get back. It's that simple.

Anything we do to needlessly cripple our competitiveness simply keeps them on the street longer. There are many measures which could get them all back tomorrow including across the board voluntary 40% paycuts.

Any takers?

Helloooooo?

Bueller?...Bueller?

The question is whether or not this PBS LOA is a good deal for the pilots while helping the company compete?

So far it looks like it is, but I am still waiting on a roadshow.

There are many reasons to vote no, but I really don't think the furloughs and "slamming" the junior pilots are valid points, as this won't screw the furloughs any more than the screwing they are already taking and the junior pilots are helped by it more than they ae harmed, just like the rest of the pilot group.