DCA
10-27-2019, 07:07 AM
#31
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2018
Posts: 449
So, you are a hard "No" on PBS...
I 100% agree that SAP is an amazing game-changer. I also agree that we should get the opportunity to vote down PBS and keep line bidding. Will that actually get us what we want?
If we vote PBS down twice it will probably go to mediation. When that happens we are going to lose because the NMB will side with the company that PBS is a contractually suitable equivalent to line bidding. We will be forced to negotiate quickly (if we get the chance at all) or get stuck with a PBS fully defined by the company. The company will have to meet the contractual obligation to have SAP, but it will be nothing like what we have and a waste of negotiating capital.
I suspect this whole process will play out within 3 years from today. Best of luck to everyone that is still here then, hopefully you'll all be senior enough to bid exactly what you want and you can be happy knowing you ******* on all the new guys instead of voting for real improvements when you had the chance.
I 100% agree that SAP is an amazing game-changer. I also agree that we should get the opportunity to vote down PBS and keep line bidding. Will that actually get us what we want?
If we vote PBS down twice it will probably go to mediation. When that happens we are going to lose because the NMB will side with the company that PBS is a contractually suitable equivalent to line bidding. We will be forced to negotiate quickly (if we get the chance at all) or get stuck with a PBS fully defined by the company. The company will have to meet the contractual obligation to have SAP, but it will be nothing like what we have and a waste of negotiating capital.
I suspect this whole process will play out within 3 years from today. Best of luck to everyone that is still here then, hopefully you'll all be senior enough to bid exactly what you want and you can be happy knowing you ******* on all the new guys instead of voting for real improvements when you had the chance.
As for screwing over the new guys, the union had no problem with senior manning, and the moronic bucket system that destroyed the advantages of seniority on reserve.
Plus how does giving up or damaging SAP not screw the new guys and gals who then have to deal with the worst reserve in the industry until they get their company built line with 75 hours and 11 days off until they flow or jump ship just like Piedmont
10-27-2019, 09:52 AM
#32
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: CRJ FO
Posts: 4,601
Lol so you're saying that when the pilot group has the most power and leverage we've ever had, when mainline needs every single pilot at their wholly owneds to stay in the AA system, when we are finally being allowed to vote on an agreement with the the company, that we should consider giving up an industry wide holy grail that is SAP?
As for screwing over the new guys, the union had no problem with senior manning, and the moronic bucket system that destroyed the advantages of seniority on reserve.
Plus how does giving up or damaging SAP not screw the new guys and gals who then have to deal with the worst reserve in the industry until they get their company built line with 75 hours and 11 days off until they flow or jump ship just like Piedmont
As for screwing over the new guys, the union had no problem with senior manning, and the moronic bucket system that destroyed the advantages of seniority on reserve.
Plus how does giving up or damaging SAP not screw the new guys and gals who then have to deal with the worst reserve in the industry until they get their company built line with 75 hours and 11 days off until they flow or jump ship just like Piedmont
The reality is that PBS will go to a vote with the pilot group. So the company and ALPA know it will have to be a pretty good deal to be a “yes” vote from the pilots. So therein lies the conundrum. Would PSA management get the go-ahead from AA to incentivize the pilots to vote in PBS? I think the answer is not right now. Therefore I don’t see PBS coming anytime soon.
10-27-2019, 11:19 AM
#33
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2018
Posts: 449
You may be surprised to know that if the company really wanted to they could probably stop the SAP. We could grieve it, go to mediation etc. Or they could just wait for the next PSA pilot to make some comments on social media and get an emergency injunction filed to stop the SAP during the holidays. A lot can happen.
The reality is that PBS will go to a vote with the pilot group. So the company and ALPA know it will have to be a pretty good deal to be a “yes” vote from the pilots. So therein lies the conundrum. Would PSA management get the go-ahead from AA to incentivize the pilots to vote in PBS? I think the answer is not right now. Therefore I don’t see PBS coming anytime soon.
The reality is that PBS will go to a vote with the pilot group. So the company and ALPA know it will have to be a pretty good deal to be a “yes” vote from the pilots. So therein lies the conundrum. Would PSA management get the go-ahead from AA to incentivize the pilots to vote in PBS? I think the answer is not right now. Therefore I don’t see PBS coming anytime soon.
I'm looking for pay and quality of life. If PSA reduces the quality of life (especially with the industry booming) then I'd just be here for the pay, and any LCC blows that out of the water.
10-27-2019, 11:27 AM
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2017
Posts: 658
You're still not grasping what I'm getting at. Literally the only reason I'm considering staying at PSA is SAP. Without SAP I'd probably just apply to an LCC and move on.
I'm looking for pay and quality of life. If PSA reduces the quality of life (especially with the industry booming) then I'd just be here for the pay, and any LCC blows that out of the water.
I'm looking for pay and quality of life. If PSA reduces the quality of life (especially with the industry booming) then I'd just be here for the pay, and any LCC blows that out of the water.
I also think the next flow increase won’t come as a negotiation chip but down from American to fill classes. RI has said many many times the way to American is through the WOs. I think in order to keep the regional structure sound they need to keep the apps coming and the flow is the next incentive. I’ve also heard a rumor the next thing down the pipe is extending the 401k structure to the regionals and cutting out a section of profit sharing just for the pilots to put us on par with the other big times.
10-27-2019, 05:04 PM
#35
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2019
Posts: 380
10-27-2019, 05:22 PM
#36
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2017
Posts: 428
And while we're at it, my conspiracy mind doesn't trust a vote on PBS. Union will juke the stats. THERE I said it! Foil hat fully on! If the company wants PBS, the company will get it regardless of the results of an abysmal ~2% pilot turnout vote. I also dont see flow as a bargaining chip, American needs pilots and PSA needs to stay competitive with their peer WOs. Flow will increase to whatever the max PSA can handle regardless of bargaining agreement. Try and pry SAP from my cold lifeless claws! YeeeYEEEE!
10-27-2019, 06:38 PM
#37
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2017
Posts: 566
Lol so you're saying that when the pilot group has the most power and leverage we've ever had, when mainline needs every single pilot at their wholly owneds to stay in the AA system, when we are finally being allowed to vote on an agreement with the the company, that we should consider giving up an industry wide holy grail that is SAP?
There are lots of things we could or should include in the negotiations to improve QOL for everyone, even reserves.
For example, a 4:30 min day benefits everyone if applied indiscriminately. A reserve would be scheduled to work a maximum of 17 days instead of 19/20 and would credit 76.5 hours for those days.
Along with that min day, including a rule in the system allowing all pilots to elect a 65 hour build would mean that senior reserves could have 15/16 days off, while the junior reserves will be stuck with only 13/14 off (the system will probably have to ignore someone's 65 hour preference and that ought to be the most junior bidders').
The ones least impacted by that min day improvement would be the senior pilots that still want to fly high-value trips for more money or more days off (the ones that rarely have a min day on their schedule).
Like I've said before. We have to see it. We ALL have to try it. And then we have to decide if it's right for us individually.
We just need to be cognizant that if we push too hard on the wrong issues we might get forced into something we really won't like.
10-27-2019, 11:31 PM
#38
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2016
Posts: 155
DCA
So, you are a hard "No" on PBS...
I 100% agree that SAP is an amazing game-changer. I also agree that we should get the opportunity to vote down PBS and keep line bidding. Will that actually get us what we want?
If we vote PBS down twice it will probably go to mediation. When that happens we are going to lose because the NMB will side with the company that PBS is a contractually suitable equivalent to line bidding. We will be forced to negotiate quickly (if we get the chance at all) or get stuck with a PBS fully defined by the company. The company will have to meet the contractual obligation to have SAP, but it will be nothing like what we have and a waste of negotiating capital.
I suspect this whole process will play out within 3 years from today. Best of luck to everyone that is still here then, hopefully you'll all be senior enough to bid exactly what you want and you can be happy knowing you ******* on all the new guys instead of voting for real improvements when you had the chance.
I 100% agree that SAP is an amazing game-changer. I also agree that we should get the opportunity to vote down PBS and keep line bidding. Will that actually get us what we want?
If we vote PBS down twice it will probably go to mediation. When that happens we are going to lose because the NMB will side with the company that PBS is a contractually suitable equivalent to line bidding. We will be forced to negotiate quickly (if we get the chance at all) or get stuck with a PBS fully defined by the company. The company will have to meet the contractual obligation to have SAP, but it will be nothing like what we have and a waste of negotiating capital.
I suspect this whole process will play out within 3 years from today. Best of luck to everyone that is still here then, hopefully you'll all be senior enough to bid exactly what you want and you can be happy knowing you ******* on all the new guys instead of voting for real improvements when you had the chance.
Dude you’re weak. Spill your heart out to the new guys.. ha!
New guys life sucks on reserve. It sucks on reserve everywhere. Eat it, take it.. then SAP. It will blow your mind. Get the days off you want, work as much as you want. PM me and let’s talk schedules. Period. Don’t let these min day guys talking here suck you into the worse thing for a pilot regarding bidding!
This fool wants to give up the best thing ever for pilots.
10-28-2019, 03:14 AM
#40
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2018
Posts: 449
I'm saying that we will get two shots to meet the company somewhere in the middle on negotiations for PBS and that the company won't accept a PBS agreement that doesn't include them getting to institute PBS. I'm saying that anything called "SAP" that we negotiate along with a PBS will be keeping a name while losing the benefits or will be an affront to seniority (ie setting aside pairings for SAP before the bid). I'm saying that if we overstep in the fight by trying to keep line bidding and SAP, as we know it, we will get diddly squat when PBS is forced on us by the mediation board (reference "reserve grid manipulation" mediation results).
There are lots of things we could or should include in the negotiations to improve QOL for everyone, even reserves.
For example, a 4:30 min day benefits everyone if applied indiscriminately. A reserve would be scheduled to work a maximum of 17 days instead of 19/20 and would credit 76.5 hours for those days.
Along with that min day, including a rule in the system allowing all pilots to elect a 65 hour build would mean that senior reserves could have 15/16 days off, while the junior reserves will be stuck with only 13/14 off (the system will probably have to ignore someone's 65 hour preference and that ought to be the most junior bidders').
The ones least impacted by that min day improvement would be the senior pilots that still want to fly high-value trips for more money or more days off (the ones that rarely have a min day on their schedule).
Like I've said before. We have to see it. We ALL have to try it. And then we have to decide if it's right for us individually.
We just need to be cognizant that if we push too hard on the wrong issues we might get forced into something we really won't like.
There are lots of things we could or should include in the negotiations to improve QOL for everyone, even reserves.
For example, a 4:30 min day benefits everyone if applied indiscriminately. A reserve would be scheduled to work a maximum of 17 days instead of 19/20 and would credit 76.5 hours for those days.
Along with that min day, including a rule in the system allowing all pilots to elect a 65 hour build would mean that senior reserves could have 15/16 days off, while the junior reserves will be stuck with only 13/14 off (the system will probably have to ignore someone's 65 hour preference and that ought to be the most junior bidders').
The ones least impacted by that min day improvement would be the senior pilots that still want to fly high-value trips for more money or more days off (the ones that rarely have a min day on their schedule).
Like I've said before. We have to see it. We ALL have to try it. And then we have to decide if it's right for us individually.
We just need to be cognizant that if we push too hard on the wrong issues we might get forced into something we really won't like.
If management decides to force us to ditch SAP I'd bet attrition would be through the roof. Like I've already said SAP is pretty much the only reason I haven't moved on yet.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
