Originally Posted by
Timbo
In fact, it is usually OUR (DALPA) PBS guys who make suggestions to the company, about changing the stack heights, thresholds, etc. and doing mulitple runs, so not as many pilots get shuffled, unstacked, etc. I don't think the LEC guy was lying, and they do have a "mutual agreement" clause, that's why they have to do multiple runs.
If the DALPA QC guys don't like what they see, after the first run, they tell the company to "...change this and that, and run it again..." until they get numbers they can both agree on re. stack heights, reserves available, etc. That is the mutual agreement part.
If it were up to the company, they would do one run, award all the open time, (unstack every trip) and eliminate all the open time, have minimum reserves, or at least as few as they could get away with. And it would be ugly for us!
To be clear, I like our PBS system, now that I know how to bid! I got my first choice of days off, and trips, and I'm only at 50% of line holders in my category. BUT... if as the MEC claims, the AVERAGE pilot is flying 87 (not me, only 73 the last two months and next month!) then PBS has cost us Thousands of jobs.
87-75=12 extra hours, per pilot, on average. Let's leave out 33% for reserves and stuck in training, that leaves about 8,000pilots flying 12 extra hours. That equates to 96,000 extra hours being flown, per month. Divide that by 75 hours and you see we have eliminated the need for about 1,280 pilots, to do the same flying.
Want to know why you ain't movin' up? That's why.
Keep parking trips and you'll see more backwards movement.
Thanks Timbo. I might have misunderstood your original post.
Agree on PBS costing jobs.
I am absolutely, 100% against trip parking. In fact, I would advocate a cap, and closing some loopholes in Swap Board / SWF. Still, I was told parking only represents 1% of swap transactions, according to that same PBS guy. Hard to believe.