System Bid has been posted
#121
...... The company could have made the minimum and maximum levels in the other seats the same if they wanted. If they had decided to move the maximum level down to meet the minimum level, then there would have been a lot more pilots sent to the 75FM seat. If they had moved the minimum number up to the maximum, then everyone would have been able to bid as a vacancy, including those in the closed bases. Hope this makes it a little more clear.
Lets ALL look forward. Eyes WIDE OPEN.
Together!
In Unity (for everyone),
DLax
#122
#123
Line Holder
Joined APC: Sep 2018
Posts: 90
Bump and flush was not better
Just because Fedex decides to reduce manning in some seats at the airline does not mean it is a free-for-all and anybody can go to any seat that their seniority holds. That would be stupid like bump and flush was stupid. At your seniority you could have bid to almost if not every seat on the last bid.
Fortune favors the bold. Go to the seat you want when you can. You never know when you’ll hold it again.
#124
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,813
I'm not sure I agree with the statement that it gives the company more control. Control over what? They have always had control over staffing levels, that didn't change. What did change is that there used to be two types of bids, an excess bid and a vacancy bid. How do you think things would have been different under the old excess bid for those 75FO's? They weren't excessing out of that seat, only adding to it. So, those pilots wouldn't be able to bid to relieve excess until the 75FO seat was over capacity. That wouldn't preclude a junior pilot from a seat that was being excessed from being assigned to a 75CM seat while the 75FO who was senior couldn't bid. To add to that, in this realignment bid, the 75FO's were senior enough to hold that 75CM seat on the previous bid, otherwise they wouldn't have pilots junior to them being assigned to the 75CM seat. Bottom line, I'm not seeing the big give here. If after this bid they decided they weren't going to have another bid for 48 months, but I retire in 45 months and thought I would bid 77CM in 12 months hoping there would be a vacancy bid, should I be able to now bump a junior pilot out of the 77CM seat because I didn't bid when I had the chance?
#125
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: B767
Posts: 808
I'm not sure I agree with the statement that it gives the company more control. Control over what? They have always had control over staffing levels, that didn't change. What did change is that there used to be two types of bids, an excess bid and a vacancy bid. How do you think things would have been different under the old excess bid for those 75FO's? They weren't excessing out of that seat, only adding to it. So, those pilots wouldn't be able to bid to relieve excess until the 75FO seat was over capacity. That wouldn't preclude a junior pilot from a seat that was being excessed from being assigned to a 75CM seat while the 75FO who was senior couldn't bid. To add to that, in this realignment bid, the 75FO's were senior enough to hold that 75CM seat on the previous bid, otherwise they wouldn't have pilots junior to them being assigned to the 75CM seat. Bottom line, I'm not seeing the big give here. If after this bid they decided they weren't going to have another bid for 48 months, but I retire in 45 months and thought I would bid 77CM in 12 months hoping there would be a vacancy bid, should I be able to now bump a junior pilot out of the 77CM seat because I didn't bid when I had the chance?
#126
Yes, that is how it works pretty much everywhere. The consequences of rash and stupid management decisions are much greater when it works that way. It helps to prevent rash and stupid decisions. Bidding is about seniority, what it's not about is "who's willing to take a chance".
#127
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: B767
Posts: 808
Yes, that is how it works pretty much everywhere. The consequences of rash and stupid management decisions are much greater when it works that way. It helps to prevent rash and stupid decisions. Bidding is about seniority, what it's not about is "who's willing to take a chance".
#128
Line Holder
Joined APC: Sep 2018
Posts: 90
Yes, that is how it works pretty much everywhere. The consequences of rash and stupid management decisions are much greater when it works that way. It helps to prevent rash and stupid decisions. Bidding is about seniority, what it's not about is "who's willing to take a chance".
Bump and flush was awesome…it allowed the over 60 crowd to get back to captain seats when no vacancies existed and forcing a subsequent cascade of people getting pushed to lower paying seats or lower seniority within their seat.
Are you advocating that every bid should allow you to go to whatever seat your seniority holds even without vacancies? Now you would never know if you would stay in your seat.
#129
This^. You can't pass up an upgrade you could have held two years ago, and then cry foul when you want to upgrade and bump someone junior who did upgrade. Like it or not, this is pretty standard practice across the industry. But I came from the regionals where we always take the first upgrade, 'cause you never know when the music will stop.
#130
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2017
Posts: 2,113
From reading this thread, to me it seems like the difference between this bid and the old excess bid form the old contract is that we end up with less training required. The one thing I think I would change is allowing those in same equipment and seat who are not subject to assignment to be able to bid another base (currently 767 & 777) that doesn’t have a vacancy but the max > min and if they are senior enough to hold it. That wouldn’t trigger a training event.
Last edited by FXLAX; 04-20-2023 at 04:23 PM. Reason: Clarity
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post