Bill Kilgore

The company has no interest in making the VTO/secondary line process agreeable to the pilot group. It benefits them if it stinks because if they make us unhappy enough, maybe we'll be more willing to accept a "PBS" style program for building VTO lines. You know, "camel's nose under the tent" and all that.

That's what I think. And I'm pretty sure I saw some black helicopters over my house last night but whatever.

Adlerdriver

That makes no sense. Make the secondary line system so bad that we'll decide to "improve" it using a version of the same system and apply it to our entire bid pack while we're at it?

PBS isn't going to happen. The union said it's a non-starter. It's a concessionary option that the negotiating committee won't entertain. Why are we still on this subject?

Huck

Because we've seen things go from "impossible" to "inevitable" around here before.

Bill Kilgore

Makes perfect sense from the company's viewpoint why do you think they keep presenting it?. Didn't say apply it to the whole bid pack. Just the VTO process (hence the "camel's nose under the tent reference hello). Not a "version of the same system". A nice bright and shiny new PBS system (from the company's viewpoint it can be sold as a big improvement so all of us who get screwed by the VTO process month after month can expect something better). No shiite the union says it's a non-starter. But anger enough guys who month after month get screwed by the VTO program and you create a voting block of people who might entertain the idea of a "new" program. Especially if it's sold as an "improvement" over the current VTO program. What percentage of our pilot group regularly bids VTO's? Not insubstantial I would think.

PBS in any form would blow. I don't dispute that or the union's opposition to it. I'm just playing conspiracy theory devil's advocate guy. If the company succeeds in getting PBS into the contract in any small way it is a victory for them. That's why the VTO process stinks, they don't have any interest in fixing it, and why they keep presenting PBS in negotiations.

I say again: the company has no interest in making the VTO process fair and equitable if they can anger a large enough percentage of guys who may be willing to entertain a different option. 51% brother.

Gunter

That is some old school management thinking for sure. But it's effectiveness here is going the way of the Dodo.

Flight ops has been proud of the huge number of high quality applicants for about 10 years now. The result is we have hired pilots who won't fall for that anymore. Sure, you still see guys like BC and DW running around who aren't as smart as they think they are as they try to manipulate the weak minded for their own purposes. But their percentage has been shrinking since 2004. With retirements starting to bite that shift is accelerating even faster.

jetstar1

Thanks for your responses. I was hoping to stay away from bringing PBS into this post. I believe that poor VTO lines will only increase the pilots resolve to stay away from PBS.

So let's leave PBS out of this topic. It is a non starter. Instead let's concentrate on the improvements that can be made going forward. I for one have attempted contact with my ALPA reps, PSIT, and the negotiating committee. I have heard back from PSIT only. I ask that every pilot communicate with ALPA and share your dissatisfaction with this process. I believe we can bring change if we all voice our concerns and supply solutions to this process.

MaydayMark

I emailed both my union Block Rep and the Negotiating Committee. No reply from either?

jetstar1

Thanks Mark.

I intend to keep contacting them until I get a response.

Gunter

Try the NC. Futures is very practiced repeating these phrases -

"Your schedule was built IAW the CBA. There was no error made."

"You should remember your worksheet input is only a request"


That is when they come in to answer the phone. Talk about a job swap. Give me that job and I'll live forever.

USMCFDX

Maybe someone knows for sure, but I thought they already used a PBS software to construct the secondary lines. When I have talked to the futures guys they always seem to reference "points" when discussing my requests.