Originally Posted by
MaydayMark
I'm a slow learner ... maybe one of you smart computer geeks can explain this one? The 'Excess Posting' published today says ...
Programming logic cannot currently manage vacancies and excesses in one bid, so we need to run separate vacancy and excess bids. A second bid, Posting 13-04, will be published the third week in April offering vacancies associated with the introduction of the B767.
I understand that the economy isn't great and we all want (need?) a proactive company that is able to adapt to changing times. I don't believe there is anything sinister in their proposed downsizing. Can anyone explain why our (legitimately) high tech company can't figure out how to manage a single bid that takes aircraft going away and new arriving aircraft all on the same bid!*?
A High School kid could write the program.
It will be interesting to hear what ALPA thinks.
It may be a way to prevent another "paid vacation" while waiting for 767 training.
If they included vacancy position postings for the 767 simultaneously with the excesses posted (which Section 24.C.1. Line 3 implies could be done). There could be a long delay prior to 767 training for some guys.
Say I bid to go last on the 727 excess (by bidding to be excessed, not relieve the excess)....and I have 767 FO as my first choice after my current seat. I may be sitting a while waiting for 767 training.
Posting the excess first, we all get training dates as soon as 7 days after the bid closes. Even if we bid for the 767 a week after our excess award (while the 1 week overlap) is in effect.
I find it hard to believe our company IT software can't handle a simultaneous vacancy/excess bid.