Search

Notices

Alaska or Jetblue?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 06-16-2019 | 07:57 AM
  #41  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,370
Likes: 0
From: 737 FO
Default

Originally Posted by Packrat
He has to be hopeful during contract negotiations. Why? Because he's going to have to convince the rank and file to vote for a contract that contains it.

Come back AFTER PBS is in your contract and let's see who's got control of the algorithm.
I don't know whether to be more impressed with your pessimism about them agreeing to a program that can give both sides efficiency out of spite or your optimism that if they were ever going to agree to it in negotiations that they would simply hand control over to the union for free outside of them.

I'm an outsider, but the comparisons some of you draw are interesting to me. "They have full control because it's in the contract, thus they will never agree to anything else." By that logic they won't ever agree to anything that isn't current book. I guess that makes your negotiating position easy.
Reply
Old 06-16-2019 | 08:47 AM
  #42  
rickair7777's Avatar
Prime Minister/Moderator
Veteran: Navy
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 44,886
Likes: 684
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
Default

Originally Posted by Packrat
The Anglers will never, repeat, NEVER allow the Union to control PBS. Don't believe me? Volunteer for the Scheduling Committee and see just how much input the Union has to the hard lines.

The Alaska MEC controlling PBS. Now THAT'S funny.
Union doesn't need to control PBS.

Contract must specify that...

Paramters are defined contractually before implementation, to the extent possible.

PBS Implementation will have full union oversight, and union will have full veto authority if it's not working out.

Any tweaks approved during implementation become contractual. Future tweaks of ANY parameter require either contractual allowance or union concurrence.

Contractual rules about pairing construction, or just let the union build pairings. That can be done within certain parameters defined by the company, but avoids stupidly wasteful pairings which result from sheer laziness of staff (seen that before).

PBS can be be win-win, you just have to fence off the territory in PBS where the company could achieve a windfall by abusing the system at the expense of the pilots. And it's not really rocket science, most airlines have PBS so there are plenty of examples to learn from (both good and bad).
Reply
Old 06-16-2019 | 08:56 AM
  #43  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 700
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Packrat
The Anglers will never, repeat, NEVER allow the Union to control PBS. Don't believe me? Volunteer for the Scheduling Committee and see just how much input the Union has to the hard lines.

The Alaska MEC controlling PBS. Now THAT'S funny.
Do we have to get "FULL" control of PBS or just a strong say, with contractual safeguards as to how the schedules are built?

If the negotiated contract language regarding scheduling and QOL provisions are solid or at least comparable to the rest of the industry, wouldn't that dictate how the algorithms are programmed into whatever PBS software we end up with?

Sure, like all the other airlines, they might try to unfairly stretch the boundaries of the contract interpretation to their advantage, but hopefully it will be solid enough to prevent that kind of exploitation or at least result in meaningful repercussions if they do.....

Curious if anyone could shed more light on this....
Reply
Old 06-16-2019 | 09:02 AM
  #44  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 700
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by rickair7777
Union doesn't need to control PBS.

Contract must specify that...

Paramters are defined contractually before implementation, to the extent possible.

PBS Implementation will have full union oversight, and union will have full veto authority if it's not working out.

Any tweaks approved during implementation become contractual. Future tweaks of ANY parameter require either contractual allowance or union concurrence.

Contractual rules about pairing construction, or just let the union build pairings. That can be done within certain parameters defined by the company, but avoids stupidly wasteful pairings which result from sheer laziness of staff (seen that before).

PBS can be be win-win, you just have to fence off the territory in PBS where the company could achieve a windfall by abusing the system at the expense of the pilots. And it's not really rocket science, most airlines have PBS so there are plenty of examples to learn from (both good and bad).
That's some serious jedi mind trick right there, it's like you knew the collective question we all had in our minds. hahaha

Great insight.. Thanks for the explanation.
Reply
Old 06-16-2019 | 09:59 AM
  #45  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Default

How ‘bout we move the PBS/Line Bidding discussion to its own home and leave this to the poor fella that wants to know about JB/AS. I should have known better than to mention PBS. Rookie mistake.
Reply
Old 06-16-2019 | 10:23 AM
  #46  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 325
Likes: 0
Default

That’s because there is nothing positive to say about Alaska, plain and simple- and yes other airlines are leaps and bounds better by a large margin.. our contact isn’t even remotely close to our peers... our contract is even subpar to most regional contracts. The minute that there is something positive to say about Alaska, I will gladly say it.

Originally Posted by Cruz5350
There’s not a single post from this guy that isn’t negative. I commute from the Midwest and wouldn’t trade Alaska for a shorter JFK commute for B6. Financially it’s better at Alaska, our rates as an FO are better we have better 401k matching and were in early negotiations for a contract that will be better than what we have. Does Alaska need a lot of work absolutely but none of these places are leaps and bounds better than the others by any large margin. So if you want to live and work on the West Coast and you have to pick between AS and B6 it’s a no brainer AS. FWIW I have a friend who is dying to leave B6 for AS so he can move back to the West Coast.
Reply
Old 06-16-2019 | 11:58 AM
  #47  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Ala5ka
That’s because there is nothing positive to say about Alaska, plain and simple- and yes other airlines are leaps and bounds better by a large margin.. our contact isn’t even remotely close to our peers... our contract is even subpar to most regional contracts. The minute that there is something positive to say about Alaska, I will gladly say it.
If you believe that there's NOTHING + to say I would say that you are cynical, naive, and haven't worked at other airlines. Needing improvements in many disparate areas - yes.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
Reply
Old 06-16-2019 | 12:03 PM
  #48  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 426
Likes: 0
From: EMB 145 FO
Default

Originally Posted by rickair7777
JB LGB base is small, very senior, and not necessarily guaranteed to be around forever.

I would not do JB unless willing to move east. A career transcon commute is a special kind of hell.

JB probably provides a better opportunity, if you don't care where you live.

But if you consider all possible merger matchups, B6 and AS would make a decent match so you might be able to have your cake and eat it too eventually.
New hires now holding LGB
Reply
Old 06-16-2019 | 01:01 PM
  #49  
Spooledup's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
From: 737 CA
Default

There is no way in hell I would go to jetBlue in your situation. Take it from me, I was in a small base in NY with VX and small bases are easy to close. I now commute trans-con and hate every minute of it. If I get 4 trips a month as a more junior lineholder, that's 4 commutes of 8-9 hours each way or between 64-72 hours a month just getting back and forth to work mostly in middle seats and jump seats. jetBlue may be the better airline in a lot of ways, but bases is not one of them in your situation. Don't get stuck in my situation and do everything you can to avoid even the possibility of a transcon commute in your future.
Reply
Old 06-16-2019 | 01:18 PM
  #50  
rickair7777's Avatar
Prime Minister/Moderator
Veteran: Navy
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 44,886
Likes: 684
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
Default

Originally Posted by mking84
New hires now holding LGB
I understand that other than some churn at the very bottom, nobody ever leaves... so seniority progression would depend on upgrades, which mostly depend on retirements (maybe there will be attrition over the next few years). I personally never applied to JB for that reason, and also due to the risk of being in the only west coast base, and a small one at that. But somebody from JB could elaborate on that better than I.

There is no conceivable difference between JB and AS which would cause me to do a transcon commute long-term, or even risk having to do one long-term.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Flyin1500
Alaska
64
10-23-2023 06:14 PM
Splanky
Regional
47
01-28-2011 07:59 AM
Lone Palm
Regional
5
01-25-2011 09:48 AM
fireman0174
JetBlue
6
08-24-2006 05:06 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices