US Pilots labor thread 11/5-

[luvn737s]

Using reason is a lost cause with these guys. There are about 3500 reasons to look for another airline to work for. And about that many reasons why there will be no merger partner for an intact US Airways.

 

[nic4us]

So there is really no advantage for the junior guy then, at least with our lines sometimes there are a few good or better trips thrown in with the crap.

Actually, I am the junior guy and here is how pbs helps me. I do not commute. The parameters I enter have everything to do with quality of life (i.e. quality of the pairing). As I do not need a late show the first day, and an early release the last day, I find that by asking for a few fundamental quality issues ( no red eyes, no flip, no shows very early home domicile time ) I seldom do any of the above. What ends up on my line is typically what I consider easy duty, but it is not very desireable if you were a commuter.

The commuters are getting what they want, late show early release, but they are doing the early reports out east to get back in time to release and go home. They get what they want, I get what is leftover, but yet usually it conforms to what I want.

So as a junior guy, I would paraphrase luvthe9 and say with pbs my lines have for my circumstances " a few lousy trips thrown in with the good or better trips."


Globalization.....yes this is the only complaint I have with pbs, and I have fallen victim to it. However, there are seniority violations with line bidding that equate to nearly the same thing. Perhaps these have been resolved in the Bid Sheet thing you have out east I do not know because I am unfamiliar with that.

Perhaps this is the first really smart thing the BPR has done. They know the company wants pbs, they know we will end up with pbs, they are just going to say no until the other areas of the contract have enough benefits so that it is the pilot group who reaps from the cost savings of working under a pbs system.

 

[nic4us]

http://www.airlinefinancials.com/Airline_A...is_pre_911.html

If you look at item #23 you will see that we have the second highest cost for pilot wages as a percentage of the average pass fare for all the legacy carriers.

Yet we have the lowest paid pilots.

I don't think demanding inefficient ways of doing business will solve this problem.

Actually, #23 graph is change in the cost from 2000-2008, and we have the smallest %change during that time period of all listed. However if you look a the table on the left, for 2008 we have the third highest cost behind SWA and AA. Also, we are within 0.1% of DL 0.3% of NW and 0.4% of CAL. Numbers that are almost insignificant. UA is 1.0% less than US the only substantial numerical advantage.

While I agree that inefficient bussiness practices ( line bidding vs. PBS etc ) will not solve this problem, I do not know that this statistic alone means there is a problem, SWA is a full 3.0% higher than anyone else on the chart, does not seem to be a problem for them.

Where I see the problem is in charts #13,#14,#15,#16,and especially #20. These charts show that while US has seen some of the greatest negative changes in employee expenses, it has not stopped management expenses from increasing as a % of pax fare by the greatest percentage in the industry. Again to be fair, on the table on the left, we have the second lowest actual management dollar cost per pax fare, but the increase is 193.9%.

 

[BLT]

Actually, #23 graph is change in the cost from 2000-2008, and we have the smallest %change during that time period of all listed. However if you look a the table on the left, for 2008 we have the third highest cost behind SWA and AA. Also, we are within 0.1% of DL 0.3% of NW and 0.4% of CAL. Numbers that are almost insignificant. UA is 1.0% less than US the only substantial numerical advantage.

While I agree that inefficient bussiness practices ( line bidding vs. PBS etc ) will not solve this problem, I do not know that this statistic alone means there is a problem, SWA is a full 3.0% higher than anyone else on the chart, does not seem to be a problem for them.

Where I see the problem is in charts #13,#14,#15,#16,and especially #20. These charts show that while US has seen some of the greatest negative changes in employee expenses, it has not stopped management expenses from increasing as a % of pax fare by the greatest percentage in the industry. Again to be fair, on the table on the left, we have the second lowest actual management dollar cost per pax fare, but the increase is 193.9%.

You have to look just under the 2008 column to see the most recent cost as % of average fare.

Is it better to have 10 pilots that are paid $1,000,000 year or 1,000,000 pilots that are paid $10 year. The answer of course is somewhere in between. I just don't see the logic in forcing inefficiencies into the operation. I think it is self destructive. You can claim you are trying to force the company to employ more pilots, but at what cost?

 

[nic4us]

You have to look just under the 2008 column to see the most recent cost as % of average fare.

Is it better to have 10 pilots that are paid $1,000,000 year or 1,000,000 pilots that are paid $10 year. The answer of course is somewhere in between. I just don't see the logic in forcing inefficiencies into the operation. I think it is self destructive. You can claim you are trying to force the company to employ more pilots, but at what cost?

That is where I looked and we are the third highest for 2008, as I stated.

I agree with you. Forced inefficiency is counter productive, however, the issue to me is simple. If there are less pilots I work more and harder. For that increased efficiency, I want that pay in my check, not managements. To use your example, we have 1,000,000 pilots making $10, we agree to a more efficient system and now only need 10 pilots, how much should those 10 pilots be paid? I say $1,000,000, you seem to be saying the 10 remaining pilots should still make $10 and the rest should go into the profits of the more efficient company, where the pilots make minimal profit sharing and management takes bonuses if we lose money and even bigger bonuses if we make money.

To answere your question "at what cost?" the answere is simple, at a reasonable cost of doing bussiness, and, that is where we are in your cost as % of pax fare table, for all practical purposes, right smack dab in the middle. If we give the company an improvement in efficiency, and a greater competitive edge in the marketplace, that is great, promotes job security etc.. as long as it it used for purposes that improve conditions for the pilot group I am all for it.

 

[traderjake]

It will only become an issue with a joint contract which in all likelihood will include Nic and as such will never even be put out for a vote

That's what you say. Judge Wake says you're wrong.

 

[Al Legheny]

The biggest problem is training. It is not a complicated system just takes some time to learn the subtle things. Also people are resistant to change and some people just refuse to learn the computer. In that case it is their problem. Take the time to learn what the options do and how they effect the outcome.

With PBS you have a better chance of getting a line you like first without all of the fixing and time later in the month.

Bottom line is PBS is a line builder. It takes all of the pairings and distributes them as best it can and remains legal. I would guess that if we ran them side by side you would end up with very similar lines at the end of the month. However with PBS you spend a few minutes and you are done for the month. With line bidding you have to spend a few hours every month fixing what someone else thought was a good line.

The best system would be PBS with the east bid sheet or SAP whichever you guys like.

The west has been running it for several years now. There are better systems out there and improvements to this old one.

Cleared Direct,

We've been through the PBS presentation. It probably works ok with over 50% living
in PHX base, with few yearly bids and no pay differential, like you have out west.
But until the company can make it capatible with our permanent seniority bidding and
guarantee strick seniority, it'll never get approved. We have 3-6 permanent bids a
year, pay differential, where an IRO block holder can make more than a C/O on
smaller equipment, and almost 80% of our pilots commuting. Your version of PBS
doesn't work for us. We permanently bid as either a block holder or reserve. Your
PBS programming doesn't guarantee holding a block (line, in your terms) every month.
A commuting pilot has to know month-to-month he will be bidding a block and not on
reserve. Hotels are expensive. Our bidding system guarantees your status.

According to your SME, your current parameters and bidding don't guarantee a block
every month of a permanent bid. With as many commuters as we have, we'll never
accept bouncing between block holder and reserve. He also said the current PBS
parameters don't guarantee seniority when a line is put together either. PBS can be
programmed with priority to make the schedule work at the least cost to the
company before guaranteeing seniority. Sure, most will get near 100% of what they
bid, but getting 90% of what you should be able to hold is a violation of seniority.
Worrying about being bounced back to reserve is unacceptable.

Don't get me wrong, block bidding isn't the greatest system, but you get what your
seniority will let you hold. If you don't like a pairing, you can SAP it out and not
have to worry about the company's poor staffing keeping you from dropping it.

If PBS can be programmed to guarantee block status and rigid seniority, it might get
a good look. But in times like these with 200 more furloughs, company efficiency at
the expense of seniority isn't a top union priority. Right now, it's DOH, I mean
DOA.

 

[flybynite]

Thanks for posting about the PBS that the company is trying to promote. That the PBS would violate seniority is totally unacceptable to AFA and everyone else.

:down:

 

[Reed Richards]

Al, it is just becoming clear to me....wait, can't quite put my finger on it...wait..just a second.

Oh Yes.... "Seniority Matters."

I detect a theme in the thoughts and actions of the East pilots.

RR

 

[cleardirect]

Cleared Direct,

We've been through the PBS presentation. It probably works ok with over 50% living
in PHX base, with few yearly bids and no pay differential, like you have out west.
But until the company can make it capatible with our permanent seniority bidding and
guarantee strick seniority, it'll never get approved. We have 3-6 permanent bids a
year, pay differential, where an IRO block holder can make more than a C/O on
smaller equipment, and almost 80% of our pilots commuting. Your version of PBS
doesn't work for us. We permanently bid as either a block holder or reserve. Your
PBS programming doesn't guarantee holding a block (line, in your terms) every month.
A commuting pilot has to know month-to-month he will be bidding a block and not on
reserve. Hotels are expensive. Our bidding system guarantees your status.

According to your SME, your current parameters and bidding don't guarantee a block
every month of a permanent bid. With as many commuters as we have, we'll never
accept bouncing between block holder and reserve. He also said the current PBS
parameters don't guarantee seniority when a line is put together either. PBS can be
programmed with priority to make the schedule work at the least cost to the
company before guaranteeing seniority. Sure, most will get near 100% of what they
bid, but getting 90% of what you should be able to hold is a violation of seniority.
Worrying about being bounced back to reserve is unacceptable.

Don't get me wrong, block bidding isn't the greatest system, but you get what your
seniority will let you hold. If you don't like a pairing, you can SAP it out and not
have to worry about the company's poor staffing keeping you from dropping it.

If PBS can be programmed to guarantee block status and rigid seniority, it might get
a good look. But in times like these with 200 more furloughs, company efficiency at
the expense of seniority isn't a top union priority. Right now, it's DOH, I mean
DOA.

This is where the misunderstanding comes in. It is in the terms. PBS has NOTHING to do with permanent bidding. PBS is simply as line builder. It would get rid of your pilot line bidder. He is worried about his job.

PBS takes the pairings and distributes them into a legal line by parameters that each individual pilot sets. If you are a commuter you can set your bid to desire trips that start later in the day and release early on the last day.

As far as bouncing between line holder and reserve. That is exactly what secondary lines are. Those vary every month. It is the same thing with PBS. If we have 400 line holders on the 320 in PHX that may go up or down by a few every month. That is just the variation in flying. Just like the secondary lines. So your statement is incorrect. You do have people that will accept bouncing between line holder and reserve.

According to your SME, your current parameters and bidding don't guarantee a block every month of a permanent bid. With as many commuters as we have, we'll never accept bouncing between block holder and reserve.

Also I hear about PBS violates seniority. You are worried about bouncing between line holder and reserve. In line building I guess you are guaranteed a set number of permanent lines. The line builder has to spread that flying out over a certain number lines so the bottom guy has at least something. Sometimes in order to make everything fit he has to juggle and put a decent trip in a lower line than it really should be. Is that a violation? How do you police the trade process? How do you guarantee that a trip does not get held back and given to someone junior?

How many times do you fly your line as published without modification?

How much time do you spend fixing your line during the month? What if you could bid a line that you wanted the first time and leave it along the rest of the month? We have a drop pick up system. I don’t like it but some people do use it. Personally I get what I want and fly the line for the month. Bidding for me takes less than an hour total every month. That is only because I bid specific trips while they are still unassigned to start.

PBS is actually better in that way. Say at the beginning of the month you have vacation, but also want to do two different specific trips on specific days. Those trips are not assigned so you bid them and possibly hold them if you are senior enough or no one wants them. Instead of bidding around vacation then hoping those trips come up during the month. They are yours to start with. So really PBS protects seniority better. You want your days off and the trip it is yours.

 

[nic4us]

Oh Yes.... "Seniority Matters."

I detect a theme in the thoughts and actions of the East pilots.

RR

It most certainly does! I need to find an east pilot to explain your system to me before I explain back how most line bidding systems can violate seniortiy that PBS would have otherwise protected.

 

[cleardirect]

Specifically what does the east like about line bidding?

Is it the quality of the printed lines?

SAP?

Is it the bid sheet?

Or is it the entire system?

I think if we could have PBS with the bid sheet then we would have something.

 

[Tiger 1050]

Cleared Direct,

We've been through the PBS presentation. It probably works ok with over 50% living
in PHX base, with few yearly bids and no pay differential, like you have out west.
But until the company can make it capatible with our permanent seniority bidding and
guarantee strick seniority, it'll never get approved. We have 3-6 permanent bids a
year, pay differential, where an IRO block holder can make more than a C/O on
smaller equipment, and almost 80% of our pilots commuting. Your version of PBS
doesn't work for us. We permanently bid as either a block holder or reserve. Your
PBS programming doesn't guarantee holding a block (line, in your terms) every month.
A commuting pilot has to know month-to-month he will be bidding a block and not on
reserve. Hotels are expensive. Our bidding system guarantees your status.

According to your SME, your current parameters and bidding don't guarantee a block
every month of a permanent bid. With as many commuters as we have, we'll never
accept bouncing between block holder and reserve. He also said the current PBS
parameters don't guarantee seniority when a line is put together either. PBS can be
programmed with priority to make the schedule work at the least cost to the
company before guaranteeing seniority. Sure, most will get near 100% of what they
bid, but getting 90% of what you should be able to hold is a violation of seniority.
Worrying about being bounced back to reserve is unacceptable.

Don't get me wrong, block bidding isn't the greatest system, but you get what your
seniority will let you hold. If you don't like a pairing, you can SAP it out and not
have to worry about the company's poor staffing keeping you from dropping it.

If PBS can be programmed to guarantee block status and rigid seniority, it might get
a good look. But in times like these with 200 more furloughs, company efficiency at
the expense of seniority isn't a top union priority. Right now, it's DOH, I mean
DOA.

Gotta say I like what you said here... The ONLY advantage to PBS is it eliminates the tedious work of line bidding. Frankly if what you say here is true I'd certainly like the east system over PBS any day!

Why? 'Cause the COMPANY controls PBS and all it's parameters...

 

[Al Legheny]

Specifically what does the east like about line bidding?

Is it the quality of the printed lines?

SAP?

Is it the bid sheet?

Or is it the entire system?

I think if we could have PBS with the bid sheet then we would have something.

As a commuter I can attest that one of the most undesireable things in PBS is allowing a system to put something in your line doesn't work.

When my old base closed I fell for a few months to bottom secondary then reserve. As a bottom secondary lineholder, I could bid defensably. That is I could bid a line that was not wat I wanted but tolerable and upgradable under SAP. Under PBS the system will just stick something in there that fits because it fits legality not commutability.

Block builiding at least allows a junior member to have the least undesireable block out there and then he can improve it in SAP. PBS will just put junk in the line to make it fit. SAP doesn't allow us to avoid trips that simply don't work. How bad can that be? Well how about trips that are not commutable on either end. Your time at home can dwindle to a week or less.

You must understnad that the company has just created several hudred more commuting pilots on the East coast. The old Boston crowd could only be removed by base closure. These are die-hard NY Yankee hating Boston Beaners who belive that civilization ends at the Rhode Island border.

There is a reason that 4 prior mangagements and two bankruptcies didn't close BOS and LGA and it has to do with the weather. Every year at this time USairways management is suprised with the arrival of this thing called winter. The last 4 or 5 have been incredibly mild. We are due for a real monster.

You may argue that weather doesn't have anything to do with PBS and you are right. But block builiding and adequate reserves in bases that will support the operation when the weather goes down has proven to be a good sytem. Delta has 10 bases, NW maintains 5, although there will be consolidation. American still has BOS and LGA + six other bases, and Unted has 7 domiciles. Maybe they know something thatTempe doesn't.

US Airways has many trips with 4 and 5 legs a day and management would like to splitt the front and back end. This will not work out East and one bad winter storm will point this out. You will end up short of cerws for one end or the other and you will burn up the on base reserves quickly then you find out that even if you wanted to bring in more help they can't get into base. Mr. Parker has admitted his ignorance of many operational issues and this is laying the ground work for one very large mess.

PBS could be made to work at US Airways but not in is present America West form. If these guys want to be a big airline they need to schedule like one and not just the pilots. PBS is a srike issue for East coast flight attendents. Quality of life = seniority. "Mess with my schedule and you die", say the PIT bulls. I just came off a trip with a 41 year vetran F/A and they will not touch PBS. Fighter Pilots say speed is life, US Airways flight attendents say "Seniority is life". Any system that violates that principle in any way is not going to pass a vote.

Much work needs to be done on the Company's entire scheduling and staffing and operational philosophy before PBS will be accepted.

When LOA 93 came along they said "Give me your money or your life." The miniscule raise proposed in the current company offer and the sheduling sytem proposed amounts to "Give me your money and your life.

It needs a lot fo work before the East pilots would even condisder discussing it.

 

[flybynite]

The system that we use (CATCREW) is very complex. It addresses ALL of our scheduling needs and parameters, seniority, vacation, blockholder, & reserve and it gets the job done without crashing. And very quickly too. This program does some serious numbers crunching. This is IBM programing at it's best. And that's why the company wants to get away from it. It costs money. The junior high kids they use for IT don't know this stuff.

In fact, you can do a internet search for CATCREW. It shows when it was developed, by who and the awards it attained. It's old but by god it gets the job done.

I'm sure someone could walk you through the basics.

Our scheduling is our quality of life. And this program pretty much takes care of that without a whole lot of shenanigans. We're just bidding 2 months out.

I'm a fan........