supercruiser

That brings up a question when looking forward. If we vote this down and enter into lengthy negotiations, what are the chances of assessments to fund the effort?

RedeyeAV8r

It doesn't work that way. If you are senior on the 777 or MD-11 and request a Single Departure Trip and you do not have Vacation or Training that month you might get it,

However, for the reset of us that usually hold 6 hour Hub turns or 20-33 hour trips it does not work as you suggest. Not even close.

Here is what happened to me and I stopped bidding VTO's.
I was the #1 VTO line holder and I my requests were Trip #123 on the 1st and #234 on the 14th for a nice DDH Week on Week off in a 4 week month and the credit value was well within the Company posted BLG range, I should have got them right ?....according to you Right? My Request was both trips in a single preference. I even bid them separately in subsequent Choices with Trip #234 preferenced before #123. How did it turn out. BTW this happened a few months in a row.

Nope it doesn't work that way. The two trips above were in open time after the view Add window closed. I didn't get Trip #234 and it went to a Pilot way junior, VTO # 27. The #27 VTO pilot apparently had carry in Vacation and owed the Company apart 36 hours, so they gave him Trip #234 on the 14th.

So the Junior Pilot got a Senior DDH Day trip and I needed up getting a 4 line departure flying nights the half of the month with no DH's.

I called my Scheduler. I asked ***? She said that I had good requests but they were only preferences and that my requested trip worked better in the more Junior Pilots schedule. I emailed the Jr Pilot and asked if he had requested trip #234 in his preferences. He said no that he had requested that week off.

I called ALPA as you suggested. I got Mr DT. Guess what the answer was? I am glad he retired.

PBS in any way shape or form is BAD, period end of story.

What really baffles me is the Company could fix the Secondary line process. They could make it to much more tolerable if they wanted to. Why don't they? They are making us spend Negotiating Capital to put a LOA Band Aid on something they already have the right to do.

FDXLAG

So keep the status quo?

iarapilot

Would that be how you solve the problem?

How about negotiate something that is concrete.

FDXLAG

We did we negotiated a working group to come up with a solution. If we dont like the solution we say no and keep the status quo.

2cylinderdriver

well all I can say is that is not what the CBA says, "built in numerical order", those replies from DT and your scheduler were not accurate and should have been grieved. We do not have a "that works better for junior, so tough luck" system. My experience has always been pilots get what they ask for (specific trips) if its legal and open. Sorry that happened to you because that is unsat.

Either way it highlights the exact problem that is trying to be fixed, a system that we directly weight our preferences and ensure that the PBS system used is NOT one that violates seniority as happened to you.

CloudSailor

This^^^

We are voting on an unknown, untested, system with no software, no language, no parameters, no penalties. If I were voting yes on this one issue, it would be because there is a HUGE amount of trust between the company and the crewforce, established via CRS sticking to the present CBA, and working to improve VTO's in all these years that they have been able to. I personally lack that trust. Not because the company is evil, but because our QOL means jack-**** to them, they are only interested in revenue and efficiency.

Imagine how you'd feel if our entire TA had been voted on by just the MEC? Why is this any different? Unbelievable that we are now defending the growing of PBS on property. KEEP R-LINES on line bidding!!! Wake up people!

Whale Pilot

If I was getting something like a million for the signing bonus I might consider changing my vote from "Hell No" to "No"

busdriver12

Built in numerical order is not specific language that specifies exactly how something must be built. There is plenty of wiggle room in there. You have decided that how we think the supposed to work is how it actually works, and therefore any time it doesn't is because a pilot messed up his requests, is that correct? All the stories that people have are because they just requested things incorrectly?

Here is what I suggest, should you (or anyone else) be really interested in following this up. Start bidding VTO's. Follow what trips go to CIC, and look at what trips should have gone to you. When it is that trips you specifically requested go to junior VTO holders (or into open time), email futures, tell them which trips that you should have had, based upon seniority, and ask to see a copy of their inputs. Then print their file out, because oddly, the file may become corrupted and unviewable some time after you read it. Take a look at exactly what was preferenced, and what the #1 request actually was, you will be surprised. Call the union, see how much information and help you get from them. And if this doesn't happen to you for awhile, talk to friends who bid VTO's, and follow up on their information-get them to do this.

Then get back to us with what you've discovered. I suspect it will be:
1. Your number one request is actually a credit hour value that the company input.
2. They won't change anything or give you explanations.
3. The union will not follow up or give you help.

I think I will start doing this every time it happens to me (about every other month that I bid VTOs). And I will get back to you with specifics. I don't want to be obnoxious, but I want them to follow the contract, and I want the union to enforce what they are supposed to.

RedeyeAV8r

Yes, except it is a Non specific LOA. When has the Company ever worked with ALPA really on specific Projects?

1. Fuel Sense?
2. Safety initiatives?
3. Pre TA QA check fights?

The negotiated working group you cite does not specify anything.
The company can come up with a new PBS system and all it takes is the MEC Chairman to approve it. If ALPA wants to do it in an LOA, at least do it outside of the Contract, otherwise simply put it in the Contract.
At least with an LOA outside the TA, the Membership would get to Vote on any deal. Now we are at the whim of one Person.

BTW, you and I probably agree on this.

Why doesn't the Company simply improve the Secondary line Software , i.e the PBS they are using now. They know it S##ks for the Pilots.

They Previously claimed that their new PiBS would be wonderful and we would love it.

Why don't they just do it and show us?

Why do we need to expend capital on a broken system?