Sluggo_63

My opinion is different. This is as someone who, under the old system, got assigned a training date by the company that conflicted with an important family event. Sent out God knows how many emails to try and switch training dates (yeah... that was a great system), had to do a three-way trade because someone was butt-hurt that someone junior was going to training ahead of them. Finally after collecting all those emails and getting the training date moved, ended up having my new training date again moved by the company to conflict with the family event again.

Under this system (if you have any modicum of seniority) can at least bypass dates that don't work for you, and won't be forced to go to training when you don't want.

Do I wish we had small monthly bids? Absolutely. Do I wish we could bid for training spots in those small bids? Hell, yes. Is this system better than what we had? Absolutely.

threeighteen

under this system seniority has become completely irrelevant.

were there issues with the old system? Sure. But this solution is not an improvement. It simply traded a small problem for a bigger problem.

Sluggo_63

Disagree. Under the last system, seniority was irrelevant. They assigned training dates in seniority order with no regard to what senior people wanted to do. You're first on the list to train and the training date starts June 1st, over your summer vacation? Tough. You send out dozens of emails and work it out yourself. At least now, if you're the senior guy, you can just bypass until after the summer and take the next spot that works.
Are there issues with the new system? Sure. But this solution is a bit of an improvement. It traded a big problem for a smaller one.

threeighteen

your argument is that a one time training date is more important than being able to hold a seat that your seniority should be hold. That’s unsat. Both are important, but being able to hold the base/seat you want is definitely more important, because that affects your QOL every. single. month.

Sluggo_63

No, if you read my original post, you'll see my argument is that this does honor seniority because all the available slots were filled in seniority order, then the junior people whose base were closing were also allowed to go to a filled spot. Yes, there are some people who feel aggrieved that the junior bumped people shouldn't have been able to go to a seat without offering it to a more senior person, but that senior person wouldn't have gotten the seat because the seat was already filled.

You are advocating for a bump and flush which would (and has in the past) cause more havoc throughout the crew force and negatively affect so many more people than this bid system does.

threeighteen

bump and flush honors seniority, current system does not.

there are currently people who are junior to me on my airplane in my base getting seats that I cannot hold because they bid 757 CA and now are getting kicked out of 757 CA even though they’ve never gone to training as a 757 captain and never will.

that does not honor seniority. If you think it does, you don’t understand what seniority is. And yes, if you get kicked out of your seat, you shouldn’t be able to hold something that your seniority doesn’t allow.

Sluggo_63

Ok. Suit yourself. But remember this conversation when the TA comes out and everyone is saying "vote on what's right for the crew force, not for you as an individual pilot."

threeighteen

that lacks relevance

threeighteen

Yes I do.

Here's how other airlines do displacement bids:

Starting at the top, you get keep your seat unless you can no longer keep your base/equipment/seat. If you can't keep your base/equipment/seat, then you get to bid for ANY seat that your systemwide seniority can still hold. If you end up bumping someone out of that seat, then they get to bid for whatever base/equipment/seat they can hold, and if they bump someone, then the same thing happens. It's the only fair way to do it that honors seniority.

Your argument supports these two F'd up things that are currently happening here:

"because a certain seat that a senior pilot could have held wasn't their first choice, they should be stuck with whatever has vacancies while pilots junior to them get to hold what was the senior pilot's second choice on the last bid"

"because someone hired 3 years ago waited to hold a certain base/equipment seat (lets say 777FO) instead of bidding 757 captain, a pilot junior to them that bid 757 captain should get 777 FO before them"

Because we basically gave up displacement bids with the 2015 and everything is now a system bid both of those things are happening under the current system and that is beyond screwed up. What if the senior pilot never even got to train on the seat they wanted due to the screwed up nature of our bidding/training? Now they are getting pushed out out of that and can only go to seats that have vacancies... while the junior pilot gets to keep a seat that their seniority honestly can't hold and your only argument for them keeping it is "well that should have been the senior pilot's first choice...." if you can't see how F'd up that is you need help.

It would be one thing to allow a junior pilot to keep a seat that a senior pilot passed up for QOL on a normal system bid, but on a bid where base/equipment/seat are being eliminated and pilots are getting kicked out of their number one choice, it's not the same; and once again, if you can't see that, you need help.

Flying Boxes

I think you just described how section 24 works! I your hypothetical scenario the senior pilot got what he bid in previous bid based on seniority. In subsequent bid, since he is not being bumped out of his seat/base he can only go to seats with vacancies.

if he is bumped (or stands in) then he can go whatever ever his seniority can hold.