R.I.P. QuickBid, QuickTrade
#21
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2017
Posts: 1,729
While you have a valid point, the comfort of our paying passengers should be paramount. If the temperature is creeping up down back due to ineffective PCA, start the APU. (Not to mention a safety issue if the heat is excessive) Saving the company notional nickels, or notional carbon credits, while your passengers and crew sweat and sit in stagnant air is absurd. Be a captain.
This is a customer service business in many respects. Your passengers will remember if they were treated poorly the next time they buy tickets, and every returning customer is vital in this environment.
This is a customer service business in many respects. Your passengers will remember if they were treated poorly the next time they buy tickets, and every returning customer is vital in this environment.
#22
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2019
Posts: 133
#25
Make sure you ask the CPO for a paper copy of the bid so that you can figure out what you are going to do. Don't write on it though, there's only one copy.
#26
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2016
Posts: 2,460
I have communicated with MH on numerous occasions. In those communications it was obvious to me he was working in concert with Envoy to make sure everything was kosher with them. And why wouldn't he? He was an Envoy pilot. If he didn't, he'd be subject to personal retaliation from management. Now he's flowed to AA so still under that AAG microscope. The QT shutdown was a blindside to him just as much as it was to us. QT shutdown had nothing to do with Spot. You can blame COVID, or management retaliation, or even Trump if you want but it had absolutely nothing to do with "poor business practices" by MH.
The current QB situation... I can see how you'd go that direction since it was known Spot was on its way out. It's thin... and maybe that works for you if you have such a thin skin you need to go down that road. However, the value in QB is the sort feature which still works (I can't even remember if there was a charge for the bid app). AND there are other ways than using the apps for easy bid entry. So I don't see a lot of "poor business practices" here either.
Perhaps if we didn't have a union that told us "that's just the way it is" when asked about contractual issues you wouldn't get such accusations about weak or lazy union representation and we wouldn't be testing your thin skin.
In the mean time, MH just had the rug pulled out from under him on QT, QB, while not dead, is being limited somewhat, and he's junior enough at AA to be sweating furlough. He's definitely had a better impact on my QOL at The Envoy since I came on board than any single union member has so MH and his work gets my support. YOU? Nope. Not with comments like that.
The current QB situation... I can see how you'd go that direction since it was known Spot was on its way out. It's thin... and maybe that works for you if you have such a thin skin you need to go down that road. However, the value in QB is the sort feature which still works (I can't even remember if there was a charge for the bid app). AND there are other ways than using the apps for easy bid entry. So I don't see a lot of "poor business practices" here either.
Perhaps if we didn't have a union that told us "that's just the way it is" when asked about contractual issues you wouldn't get such accusations about weak or lazy union representation and we wouldn't be testing your thin skin.
In the mean time, MH just had the rug pulled out from under him on QT, QB, while not dead, is being limited somewhat, and he's junior enough at AA to be sweating furlough. He's definitely had a better impact on my QOL at The Envoy since I came on board than any single union member has so MH and his work gets my support. YOU? Nope. Not with comments like that.
#27
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2019
Posts: 537
I have communicated with MH on numerous occasions. In those communications it was obvious to me he was working in concert with Envoy to make sure everything was kosher with them. And why wouldn't he? He was an Envoy pilot. If he didn't, he'd be subject to personal retaliation from management. Now he's flowed to AA so still under that AAG microscope. The QT shutdown was a blindside to him just as much as it was to us. QT shutdown had nothing to do with Spot. You can blame COVID, or management retaliation, or even Trump if you want but it had absolutely nothing to do with "poor business practices" by MH.
The current QB situation... I can see how you'd go that direction since it was known Spot was on its way out. It's thin... and maybe that works for you if you have such a thin skin you need to go down that road. However, the value in QB is the sort feature which still works (I can't even remember if there was a charge for the bid app). AND there are other ways than using the apps for easy bid entry. So I don't see a lot of "poor business practices" here either.
Perhaps if we didn't have a union that told us "that's just the way it is" when asked about contractual issues you wouldn't get such accusations about weak or lazy union representation and we wouldn't be testing your thin skin.
In the mean time, MH just had the rug pulled out from under him on QT, QB, while not dead, is being limited somewhat, and he's junior enough at AA to be sweating furlough. He's definitely had a better impact on my QOL at The Envoy since I came on board than any single union member has so MH and his work gets my support. YOU? Nope. Not with comments like that.
The current QB situation... I can see how you'd go that direction since it was known Spot was on its way out. It's thin... and maybe that works for you if you have such a thin skin you need to go down that road. However, the value in QB is the sort feature which still works (I can't even remember if there was a charge for the bid app). AND there are other ways than using the apps for easy bid entry. So I don't see a lot of "poor business practices" here either.
Perhaps if we didn't have a union that told us "that's just the way it is" when asked about contractual issues you wouldn't get such accusations about weak or lazy union representation and we wouldn't be testing your thin skin.
In the mean time, MH just had the rug pulled out from under him on QT, QB, while not dead, is being limited somewhat, and he's junior enough at AA to be sweating furlough. He's definitely had a better impact on my QOL at The Envoy since I came on board than any single union member has so MH and his work gets my support. YOU? Nope. Not with comments like that.
#28
Line Holder
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: A320 FO
Posts: 34
For the record, thread title is misleading. QuickBid still sorts the lines and you can still use the script files there to automate inputting your bids on PC and Mac. Only the app methods are broken because you can't send keystrokes to apps on mobile devices.
Made nowhere close to that. People everywhere can choose to pay for convenience for all sorts of things but you're implying I am a bad person here because I recovered costs? I spent a lot of my time working on it. Had to teach myself to code. liteSabre at AA is $20 a month but I kept the price at $5 for QT so people could have lots of P2P options for trading.
Exactly. I understand that QB and QT are not protected by the contract and the union is not obligated to protect them. The contracts protect what the majority of crew members want from being taken away by the company at a whim. The company just proved that anything not in the contract WILL be taken away at a whim. So what is the answer? If crew members want something like QT, it needs to be in the contract.
So now you'll say, "But MH, why should the union have to fight to put your side business in their contract? Isn't that totally self serving?" To which, I would reply "Because unions fight for what their constituents want." I would then elaborate that QuickTrade by name should NOT be put into the contract, but the idea of it (a point and click interface for the ATTOT system) is what should be put into the contract. Envoy could then use QT to fulfill the contract until such point in time they develop one of their own or whatever else happens down the road. All that would matter is that crew members finally got a system that wasn't from the 60s anymore.
Until very recently Appropriations were not protected by the contract. People wanted them and the union negotiated a LOA and now it's in the contract. Do the crew members at Envoy want QT enough to put it in the contract? That is the question the union should be asking.
Thank you, this means a lot. All I ever wanted to do was help people make their work schedules better. And no one else was doing it.
So now you'll say, "But MH, why should the union have to fight to put your side business in their contract? Isn't that totally self serving?" To which, I would reply "Because unions fight for what their constituents want." I would then elaborate that QuickTrade by name should NOT be put into the contract, but the idea of it (a point and click interface for the ATTOT system) is what should be put into the contract. Envoy could then use QT to fulfill the contract until such point in time they develop one of their own or whatever else happens down the road. All that would matter is that crew members finally got a system that wasn't from the 60s anymore.
Until very recently Appropriations were not protected by the contract. People wanted them and the union negotiated a LOA and now it's in the contract. Do the crew members at Envoy want QT enough to put it in the contract? That is the question the union should be asking.
In the mean time, MH just had the rug pulled out from under him on QT, QB, while not dead, is being limited somewhat, and he's junior enough at AA to be sweating furlough. He's definitely had a better impact on my QOL at The Envoy since I came on board than any single union member has so MH and his work gets my support. YOU? Nope. Not with comments like that.
#29
Line Holder
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: A320 FO
Posts: 34
#30
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2017
Posts: 3,624
For the record, thread title is misleading. QuickBid still sorts the lines and you can still use the script files there to automate inputting your bids on PC and Mac. Only the app methods are broken because you can't send keystrokes to apps on mobile devices.
Made nowhere close to that. People everywhere can choose to pay for convenience for all sorts of things but you're implying I am a bad person here because I recovered costs? I spent a lot of my time working on it. Had to teach myself to code. liteSabre at AA is $20 a month but I kept the price at $5 for QT so people could have lots of P2P options for trading.
Exactly. I understand that QB and QT are not protected by the contract and the union is not obligated to protect them. The contracts protect what the majority of crew members want from being taken away by the company at a whim. The company just proved that anything not in the contract WILL be taken away at a whim. So what is the answer? If crew members want something like QT, it needs to be in the contract.
So now you'll say, "But MH, why should the union have to fight to put your side business in their contract? Isn't that totally self serving?" To which, I would reply "Because unions fight for what their constituents want." I would then elaborate that QuickTrade by name should NOT be put into the contract, but the idea of it (a point and click interface for the ATTOT system) is what should be put into the contract. Envoy could then use QT to fulfill the contract until such point in time they develop one of their own or whatever else happens down the road. All that would matter is that crew members finally got a system that wasn't from the 60s anymore.
Until very recently Appropriations were not protected by the contract. People wanted them and the union negotiated a LOA and now it's in the contract. Do the crew members at Envoy want QT enough to put it in the contract? That is the question the union should be asking.
Thank you, this means a lot. All I ever wanted to do was help people make their work schedules better. And no one else was doing it.
Made nowhere close to that. People everywhere can choose to pay for convenience for all sorts of things but you're implying I am a bad person here because I recovered costs? I spent a lot of my time working on it. Had to teach myself to code. liteSabre at AA is $20 a month but I kept the price at $5 for QT so people could have lots of P2P options for trading.
Exactly. I understand that QB and QT are not protected by the contract and the union is not obligated to protect them. The contracts protect what the majority of crew members want from being taken away by the company at a whim. The company just proved that anything not in the contract WILL be taken away at a whim. So what is the answer? If crew members want something like QT, it needs to be in the contract.
So now you'll say, "But MH, why should the union have to fight to put your side business in their contract? Isn't that totally self serving?" To which, I would reply "Because unions fight for what their constituents want." I would then elaborate that QuickTrade by name should NOT be put into the contract, but the idea of it (a point and click interface for the ATTOT system) is what should be put into the contract. Envoy could then use QT to fulfill the contract until such point in time they develop one of their own or whatever else happens down the road. All that would matter is that crew members finally got a system that wasn't from the 60s anymore.
Until very recently Appropriations were not protected by the contract. People wanted them and the union negotiated a LOA and now it's in the contract. Do the crew members at Envoy want QT enough to put it in the contract? That is the question the union should be asking.
Thank you, this means a lot. All I ever wanted to do was help people make their work schedules better. And no one else was doing it.
I will be trying the scripts this time around and hope it works. Good luck and be well.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post