Originally Posted by
svergin
I think this represents the basic problem. You don't understand that having more bid weightings REDUCES the solvers work. There would not be as much iteration with more bid weightings. Its not # of bid groups X # of trips that determines the possible combinations. The only reason we have multiple bid groups is because of the LACK of bid weightings. If you don't believe me read where ALPA proposed adding 2 weighting groups H+++ and L--- to take the total to 9 instead of 7.
The only reason I can think of why so many people don't understand that this specific PBS is terrible are because either they think all PBS systems will be difficult so why change when they have already have learned this one, or because they don't understand how it works.
We should let seniority determine lines, not bidding skill and/or limited weighting choices.
I get what you're saying adding another weighting pool. I would love to have it, because it adds another level of fidelity.
Also agree the weighting has subrogated seniority.
The times I haven't gotten my first choice were usually because it prevented someone below me from getting their schedule.
As far as bidding skill, if a senior bidder isn't willing to work as hard to get smart on it vs a junior guy, that's their fault as its a level playing field and everyone has the same tools available.