In the latest negotiating update, the negotiating chairman, I think, says something to the effect of....

"PBS is a non starter for "regular lines" in this contract".

In fact, he said it twice, and both times he said "regular lines" or "regular line holders".

So, am I paranoid, or is this a "wink" to the company that PBS might be ok for Secondary Lines or Reserve Lines?

If I am overly concerned about nothing, why did he specify "regular lines", instead of just flat out saying that PBS, in any form or fashion, is unacceptable?

I think these things are well rehearsed, and the wording is approved by lawyers before it is said, so I don't think what he said was by accident.

Please go and listen to the negotiations update, and see what you think before posting.

I would call the union and ask them, but they are closed on Saturday.

My negotiating committee speaks for me, but they are also accountable to me.

I'd hate to see them try to sneak something by us, as has been done by other negotiating committees in the past.

 

A PBS type system is already in place for secondaries, and has been for a while. Anytime you give preferences for certain trips or days off, etc, and the company builds your lines around known absences, like training or vacation, that's PBS.

 

Is there anything stopping them from using PBS (or any other scheduling system) to design Reserve Lines now?

 

The CBA has clear rules on how reserve lines are constructed, but to your question, no they can't publish "blank" reserve lines, award them and then use PBS type of system to build them for individual pilots.

As others have said, read nothing into the use of "regular" lines. The CBA and current practice is a PBS (poor first gen) system with almost no pilot interface. The CBA also has all the latitude needed for the Company to improve the secondary system to allow pilot interface and provide many of the "nice" things like a "reasons" report. They, thus far, choose to let the current secondary line system falter and sputter because they do not want to spend money on it unless they can get....full on PBS. More bang for the buck so to say.

We just need to follow the lead of the MEC and not worry about this. The Union published a web page to register your support against this, get to work all!

 

Good catch. I also didn't hear them say anything about maintaining our retirement for "current seniority holders".

 

OK ... maybe I wasn't clear enough? My fault, I'll ask the question differently. I wasn't suggesting that they publish blank Reserve lines (where did I say that?) at all, instead I was asking if the "could" PUBLISH "PBS like" reserve lines in the bid pack and assign those in seniority order?

Having been on Reserve much of the last 8 years I'd suggest the current Reserve system leaves much to be desired. As it is now many of the Reserve line are un-commutable (is that a word?) as they start on Mondays and/or end on Sunday night.

You're it ...

 

Not to pick nits, but ...

I'm not a very big management supporter. They've proven on more than one occasion that they will take advantage of the slightest "gray area" but ...

I think I heard Scott Stratton say (twice) this week that the Union has heard loud and clear that the membership will not accept PBS in ANY form?

His words were something to the effect of, "It would decimate our lines, vacation and RESERVE, "if" we didn't already have trust issues with management.

Maybe you heard (or didn't hear) something different? Personally, I think management knows it's a dead issue and is using this as a distraction to prolong negotiations.

 

My take is the union is saying to the company, your welcome to improve the secondary line process. The secondary lines (current pbs) couldn't get any worse.

 

no they can't, just read section 25 and the rules are solid regarding reserve. They can publish RSV lines that comply with the CBA, period.

Sorry I was confused on your question intent, PBS implies a schedule building process on an individual, preferential based input for all line types at every carrier I know that uses it. There are only 2 line types; line holder or reserve.

I agree our reserve line rules are inadequate and I think the NC has said (look at the openers) that RSV line construction and overall RSV rules are high on the list.

 

that is a clear goal in our openers, actually to improve our retirement. What I heard him say was that the Company proposal had NOTHING in it for current pilots and they proposed a new "scheme" (my words) for the unborn FDX pilot. If you are concerned call your rep