CloudSailor

YES!!!!! Thank you.

BlackKnight

Dats funnyz rite der...

busdriver12

After I look at it again, it is unclear to me as to whether this is during the implementation period or the development period. Either way, that doesn't sound like a good thing, and is one of those issues that can be up to interpretation. More imprecise TA language. It does say that the MEC chairman must meet with the VP of flight ops and agree on final acceptance prior to implementation, or it doesn't get implemented.

busdriver12

Changes to the VTO system is what tipped the scale for me when voting. I am a QOL voter, higher pay/retirement/benefits are nice, but not my top priority. Everyone who relies on a VTO could be in for a shock when they add up to 20% of the reserve blocks into the VTO system, and assign them without regard to seniority, in order to build the companies desired target hours. I found out the hard way that the company assigns 100,000 points to their target hour parameter, with your #1 choice valued at a mere 100 points.

I thought perhaps I was being a little paranoid about this, but after time, and no satisfactory answers except for to trust the negotiator's interpretation of this--I believe it is a major gain for the company, and a huge loss for anyone who bids VTO's. The seniority language was deleted purposefully, and not revised to something that could have protected it. A huge QOL loss for commuters who absolutely don't want reserve, and know how difficult it can be to drop it. Good luck trying to trade your schedule to fix that one.

This isn't back door PBS, it's coming through the front door.

TonyC

That's exactly what Negotiating Committee Member BS said. -- Webcast 3.






.

busdriver12

Is that supposed to make us feel better, or worse? I haven't listened to the webcasts. I don't need to hear any TA selling pitches, just the facts.

CloudSailor

Bingo!!!

But at least it's not PiBS, we changed the name to SLR, to give the illusion that we protected our sacred 'line in the sand'.

I'm with you busdriver12, it's all about the QOL. I have not once thought the pay rates were an issue, for me personally - with a single income family, NB FO.

And yes, I see lack of improvement to the A-plan as a huge QOL concession. A DB plan would allow me to stay senior as an FO for many more years, knowing that I can max out my DB plan with the high 5. Our move towards eliminating it (oh yes, they will come after the ENTIRE A-plan in 2021 if this TA is ratified), and 'replacing' with a DC plan, is incentive to make as much $ as possible, as early as possible = being junior in your seat more often, and for longer. QOL rules the day for me. This TA, not so.

TonyC

Well, I wasn't really trying to affect anybody's feelings, I was just affirming what you said.

I watched the videos because I wanted to find a reason to vote Yes and move on with my life. It certainly would be more simple. The smirks and laughs and remarks I witnessed throughout the videos had the opposite effect -- when they opine about "my perspective as a scheduler" and refer to pilots as "they", I have to wonder whose best interest they serve.

We asked for improvements to the Secondary Line system, and that was a high priority. One improvement we'll have is that Open Time will be reset before the Secondary Line assignment process begins, so we'll have an opportunity to see what trips really exist. Not wasting preferences on trips that aren't even available, having already been assigned as a Make-Up, for example, will VASTLY improve what we have. That "fix" is supposed to be implemented at DOS, and that fix alone would have satisfied the "Improve the Secondary Line Process" goal. Since all these guys are schedulers, they had to take it steps beyond to grow the Secondary Line system by incorporating 20% of R-days and looking for more advanced software. I'm sure The Company is counting on using it as the next step to converting our entire system to PBS, and I fear the SIG will be happy as long as they're close to the process.

You don't boil a live frog by throwing him in a pot of hot water. You start at room temperature and slowly turn up the heat.






.

FDXLAG

So tony is there any software out there for secondary lines that cant be upscaled to PBS? Isnt the current software for secondary lines essentially a very bad Preferential Bidding System? What is secondary line building supposed to do if it doesn't allow preferences? Currently our secondary line software appears to be a Random Bidding System. So you are afraid we will wake up on DOS+3 and the company will have implemented PBS? I am really not sure what the problem is, with respect to software. I can understand the desire to not in clude more R days in the process, but better software should be good right?

busdriver12

That fix should have been a win/win for the pilots and the company, and in fact should have been done for everyone's benefit, a long time ago. The futures schedulers, I am absolutely certain, do not want to waste their time wading through all the inputs that we have requested, with the majority of trips already gone by the time the VTO process commences. They do not input trip requests when the trips are already filled, and I know it is a time consuming hassle for them to go through this.