No comment on ASA PBS LOA yet?

[Poppa Hodax]

What will change for the worst for you personally if we got it?

I can't say. I haven't seen the language yet. That being said, I don't expect the Reserves had their needs addressed in any great detail. PBS is for the line holders, and the Union is primarily concerned with line holders.

What is the bad of having PBS?

Again, I must wait to see the actual language of the LOA before I can look for the bad or good. However, I am, with no other information, inclined against PBS because:

• Every person I have talked to employed by a carrier with PBS advised me, typically using rather strong language seasoned with profanity, that PBS is not good for the pilot group. Others have had different experiences. Your mileage may vary.
• The contractual language associated with PBS is just as important (if not more so) than the software used. I don't have confidence that the Union will get tight enough language to prevent the Company from meddling with the system. Largely, we can't pin too much hope on the Union because negotiating contracts and agreements aren't their core strengths. Flying airplanes is.
• To reiterate: I don't see the point of replacing a system that inherently favors the senior folks with a system that further favors the senior folks. Being junior sucks, so why make it suck more when there is forecast to be so little movement for a long while?
• The Company wants PBS really, really, really, really badly. The aims and values of Labor and Management are more or less diametrically opposed, so something that is apparently so very good for the Company is likely not very good for the pilots.
• Scheduling software is a commodity. Why bother with the pilots? Why not just buy the software, and deliver efficient lines for the pilots to choose from? This facet just makes me suspicious. Getting pilot buy in doesn't make sense, unless there is some hidden cost to the pilot group, or some hidden benefit to the Company. Why bother with pilots at all, if possible to avoid it? Have you ever dealt with those people? They just complain all the time.
• Finally, I am irked that the Company and the Union seem to assume that PBS passing a vote is a done deal. Both would be well served to bear in mind that PBS isn't a fact of life at ASA until the votes are counted. I admit that this tenet is petty, but I am annoyed that The Company has already migrated back to Flica on the assumption that PBS will pass. I was particularly vexed by the Union shills I overheard on the bus, deeply engaged in a mutual admiration autoerotic love fest on the matter of how awesome it will be when PBS gets here. It isn't voted on yet, fellas. Maybe the Union should spend a little less time patting themselves on the back, and a little more time selling it to the people who pay them with their Union dues.

I ultimately don't have confidence in the Union to get the language tight enough. I don't think that the Company is waiting until the ink is on the paper to begin Phase 2 of their nefarious plan. They aren't evil. I understand that both sides read and interpret the language of any agreement to their own ends. With that in mind, I don't have faith that the Union will get tight enough language to make the system work as it was intended, resulting in a system that works as the Company wants it to work.
One follow on thought to this whole PBS thing: what does it really cost the pilot group? This is about more than scheduling, and senior guys getting more awesome lines and junior ones getting the offal. Before you vote, take a really hard look at what else is in the agreement. Do the Company and Union expect to delay negotiations? What else do we get for helping the Company be more efficient? I've heard of a 1% raise. Do the junior folk consider giving up the ability to turn one week of vacation into three worth a fifty cent an hour raise? Did we finally get holiday pay? I sincerely hope that the voting members actually read the whole package, and not the spiffy color email from the Union. Be aware that nothing in this world is free. What we are giving up to accept PBS is just as important as what we are getting with PBS. If PBS does pass, I hope we don't sell ourselves too cheaply.

 

[buscap]

Well said Poppa.

 

[OCP]

I completely agree that we need to read the actual language to look for the loopholes in it. However everything that is feared as "bad" the company already right now has the leverage to do to us. So far in this LOA I've seen a lot of that cleaned up. Yes the company could just do it for us and buy the software to run a schedule, but that isn't how the world works. Remember how we all loved them moving from Flica to the in house software? That was great. There is nothing in the contract as it stands from them just moving to an even worse version of that.
As far as what people you talk to say... I've talked to a lot of people as well. Skywest doesn't seem to like theirs, Continental doesn't either. However I haven't talked to a Delta guy who didn't like theirs. Also, not that they are around, but ex TWA guys I've talked to liked theirs. TWA had a LARGE input from their union every month with their system, like we are supposed to. So not EVERYONE has bad things to say about PBS. Just the ones where the company is unwilling to work with the union to address problems.

 

[Tarzan]

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.

Either way, each one created less need for personnel. When profit margins are razor thing, a few million here and there can make the difference between black and red for a quarter. Most pilot seem to believe there are tens of millions to be svaed here thus making it big deal. All I am saying there isn't as much as pilot seem to believe.

 

[www.]

Well I have been saying that since page 15. The furloughs are really the only logical answer. How else would they be able to secure what they say is the best deal for us outside of section 6. If the company thought they could force a poor PBS system, and not have to recall furloughs after section 6 talks were done, they would not give us a better system now. I don’t agree but a union member said our only leverage is to strike and I don’t see us threatening a strike for PBS. Our leverage is coming from the company not wanting to recall furloughs. Just connect the dots and that is the only solution. The provided reason of the company wanting growth will not be entertained until you convince me how we are going to become cheaper than Skywest.

You mean like your Buddy Obama did on 12/25/2009? That worked GRRRRRREAT!

 

[aircombat]

Either way, each one created less need for personnel. When profit margins are razor thing, a few million here and there can make the difference between black and red for a quarter. Most pilot seem to believe there are tens of millions to be svaed here thus making it big deal. All I am saying there isn't as much as pilot seem to believe.

I agree with you 100% on that. The thing is when you are dealing with small margins you had better be sure your math is accurate. The saying goes “close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades”. The only consolation prize on this is a nice thank you from Inc.

Previously growth at the regional level was all over the place. Companies could be awarded contracts for reasons other than being the cheapest. Such as the ability to finance aircraft, keep up with staffing needs, and other benefits an individual company could bring to the table.

Things have changed and we are not an individual company. We are an alter ego airline, and as such we are not competitive and will not grow until we are cheaper than our sister company. PBS isn’t going to come close to making us cheaper than Skywest.

 

[www.]

I agree with you 100% on that. The thing is when you are dealing with small margins you had better be sure your math is accurate. The saying goes “close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades”. The only consolation prize on this is a nice thank you from Inc.

Previously growth at the regional level was all over the place. Companies could be awarded contracts for reasons other than being the cheapest. Such as the ability to finance aircraft, keep up with staffing needs, and other benefits an individual company could bring to the table.

Things have changed and we are not an individual company. We are an alter ego airline, and as such we are not competitive and will not grow until we are cheaper than our sister company. PBS isn’t going to come close to making us cheaper than Skywest.

Why do you find the need to talk about this on this forum instead of talking directly with the other pilots at ASA face to face OR on their ALPA board? The ASA pilots will be the ones voting on it not the members of FI.

 

[OCP]

(In best guy on TV voice) Not only am I a member of FI, but I'm also an ASA pilot.

 

[aircombat]

Why do you find the need to talk about this on this forum instead of talking directly with the other pilots at ASA face to face OR on their ALPA board? The ASA pilots will be the ones voting on it not the members of FI.

I have posted on the ALPA board voicing my concerns about PBS and I do talk to pilots on the line. If you are trying to imply that I am trying to hide who I am, that is simply not the case. I have several reasons why I post on FI more. First you can reach a lot more people. Even people outside our airline who may benefit from our debates. There is only a handful of people who know how to view the ALPA board. ALPA makes it a pain in the but to even find the chat board and it‘s layout is awful. Before this PBS thing I would like to think our union dues were going to more productive things than web development. So it is easier to post on FI.

Nah just kidding I do it because like the avatars.

 

[Tarzan]

Nah just kidding I do it because like the avatars.

Except for Speedtape's.