dojetdriver
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2004
- Posts
- 1,998
All line bidding systems are the same. You sort through lines, pick a line that might have 50-75% of what you want, and bid for it. Then you repeat as many times as the number you are in your seat.
Correct. PBS can/will do the exact same thing though. When it finally gets to your seniority, that in NO way means it will give you 100% of your preferences. If you're the 4-4day a month type, doesn't mean ALL trips will be to you liking. Especially if there are other things at play, IE high credit window, etc etc etc. Which just loops us back around to it being more about the workrules than the system itself.
You guys have a better open time system than we have (which may or may not let you handle the 25-50% of trips that you got but don't want to do), but let's be honest here, your line bidding system was the same as what we had under Flica.
Won't disagree with your last statement. But therein lies the problem. The diehard on the ASA side DON'T want the open time system. Because to them it means less line holders. Although that's a bit of a fallacy as phase 2/relief line bid takes care of most of that.
There's no reason we couldn't have ASA's PBS with XJT's open time windows.
See above. It's a circular problem that's dependent of what the groups want, that can further be broken down into each specific group's seniority demographic.
So it just means we argue the SAME points. PBS can hand you sh** with NO recourse. XJT line bid can hand you sh**, but with recourse. If PBS language could create the same amount of open time as the SLIW, that'd be great. But it goes agains the core principle of PBS. It's a efficiency tool for the company FIRST AND FOREMOST who's goal is eliminate open time.
About the only exception is the way TWA ran their PBS system, which used the execution that it would be 100% under the pilot groups control. Company doesn't like the solution/sort/ward? Tough sh**, deal with it.