Systemized

Independent processes, yes but directly connected to each other.


The only way to switch to a PBS without messing up the SAP is keeping the current bidding time table. Round 1 w/ PBS, followed by SAP, then round 2 w/ PBS. During Round 1, there needs to be a limit on the amount of lines PBS can award. Meaning, if there's 250 bidders, PBS could only award 190 lines. This would leave enough trips for SAP and the remaining 60 pilots would bid in round 2 PBS after the SAP. The round 2 PBS would award trips and reserve days resulting in lines with just trips, lines mixed of reserve and trips and lines with just reserve days.

If the above happens, SAP would function the same exact way it does now, or better because of less people SAPing and no more split trips. win win

TallFlyer

You should think more in terms of a contractual percentage of block hours left in open time post PBS award.

AboveAndBeyond

Our MEC has screwed up just about everything that they have touched. They can't even count the number of people listed as "active" captains on the seniority list. I do not trust them with anything in regards to the schedules that we have.

I'd rather deal with the devil that I know rather than the devil that I don't know. If the company wants PBS, there is a reason for it, and it isn't because they are being generous. They are trying to screw us in a different way. The company is playing chess. We are playing with our willies.

If we say that there must be "X" percentage left after PBS, it will all be garbage 200 flying with 14 hour 4 day trips. They will be contractually compliant but it will make SAP worthless. As it stands now, I can easily pick up trips worth more than 5 hours of credit per day.

Don't give away the only good thing that we have.

Also, the MEC is trying to help the company by adding language where some people will not be able to SAP holidays away. Complete garbage. If the company wants people to work holidays, just pay more. Let people decide. Don't give away benefits.

FlyyGuyy

If this is true... Then the MEC should be recalled. But where are you getting this information from?

TallFlyer

Lol....... not anywhere of this world, that's for sure.

Again, PBS, changes in SAP, etc, are a Pilot Vote.

Period.

Full Stop.

TallFlyer

There are so many things in your post from way out in left field, that it aint even funny.

Talk to your Reps.

And I can count just fine.

AboveAndBeyond

Are you going to put changes to a pilot vote that affect this? If so, why? Why would you support giving benefits that we have away?

And someone obviously can't count. If it is the company, then what are we doing about it?

Systemized

Why would that be preferable over a set limit of lines that can be awarded during the round 1 PBS? I'm not disagreeing with you, just curious on your thoughts? Both concepts are intended to achieve the same objective of saving uncovered trips for the SAP.

Do you agree on the need to keep the same time tables as we have know for bidding? Round 1 PBS, then SAP, then Round 2 PBS.

It would benefit both the company and round 1 bidders to keep as much uncovered trips post round 1 PBS award as possible. More uncovered trips equals more to trade with during the SAP for round 1 guys. And more left over trips means more control over schedules for the company because of less pilots in Round 1 not using the SAP.

Systemized

If you read the flow LOA carefully, you will learn the problem is not the current MEC but the language in the LOA itself.

The LOA does not define what an "active captain" is and that's the problem. The company and the MEC are using different metrics to calculate number of active captains because the LOA does not precisely spell out exactly what is an active captain.

Do we just use the master seniority list? Do we use the bid awards? Do we include line qual'd sim instructors that don't fly the line? Who knows

The three people on the NC that came up with the LOA don't care because they've all flowed, haha. Get mad at those guys, not the MEC.

AboveAndBeyond

Remind me again, who was the MEC chairman when this LOA was implemented and signed?

Why won't the current MEC answer questions about what number the company is using and how far away we are? I have emailed 3 separate times with no response at all.