I'm not an ASA pilot but I do have a lot of experience with different PBS systems, their use and application. PBS is not new. It has been around since the 80's. It is definitely a double edged sword. When negotiated and used to your benefit it can be very beneficial for you. The pilot groups that have the most experience with PBS are America West, Hawaiian and NW. They love it - now. But those same pilot groups have been hopelessly screwed with it too. Like most pilot groups when implementing PBS you guys on this forum are focusing on the wrong things. That will lead you to bad decisions and contract language. PBS changes almost every single aspect of how pilots are scheduled. There is no comparison with bid lines. You need to data dump everything you think you know about line construction and start with a clean sheet of paper.
Some things to consider
-Management can take two different approaches to using PBS. The first is a misguided attempt to improve 'utilization'. That can only be done with the marketing schedule and trip construction. If they attempt to use PBS for this they are using it to reduce line holders days off. This was tried by America West in the late 90's, NW in the summer of '06 and a number of other properties. It results in a lot of cancellations and a miserable pilot group with every one scheduled at or near the min days off. The contract language that facilitates this revolves around vacation and training credit and line minimum and maximum values. In NW's case they received no credit for vacation or training and their lines were still constructed to the maximum credit.
-After management screws this up they either keep banging your head against the wall trying to make it work or they learn to use PBS as a cost management tool - the second approach. When used as a cost management tool they simply want every pilot to earn his minimum guarantee for the month. The vacation and training credits that lines are constructed with will equal the actual pay you receive for them. When this approach is used it can be very, very good for the pilot group. It is a cost management tool that reduces the cost of being over staffed to a minimum.
You need to look at the language and see which approach it is taking. Open time issues such as trip swap systems become almost irrelevant. There should be a minimum of open time, if any, at the end of line construction. Any language that forces the company to leave time in open time should be considered very carefully. With PBS systems in place management will learn to run a bare bones reserve system - they won't be working much - and any big increase in open time tends to result in mandatory over time.
Linking PBS to issues other than line construction has generally, but not all the time, resulted in poor PBS language for the pilots. You make concessions you shouldn't. PBS should be considered on its own. The LOA process you are evidiently using, outside of Section 6 negotiations, gives you a lot of leverage for this. Fix your other problems in Section 6 negotiations.
Most pilot groups, once they get it right, love PBS. NW, America West, Hawaiian and PCL are good examples. Get it wrong - CAL, United and you will hate it. The system involved doesn't seem to make a difference. Some of the users of the NavTec system love it, some hate it. The same for the Kronos system. The key is knowing what to negotiate.
Good luck.