Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)
-   Envoy Airlines (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/envoy-airlines/)
-   -   R.I.P. QuickBid, QuickTrade (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/envoy-airlines/130372-r-i-p-quickbid-quicktrade.html)

Cyio 07-13-2020 07:47 AM


Originally Posted by Eclipse (Post 3090926)
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.

Great post and glad you stopped by to give your thoughts. I agree 100% with that last paragraph about the benefit your software gave me far exceeds much else I’ve seen around here.

I will be trying the scripts this time around and hope it works. Good luck and be well.

MqWhistleblower 07-13-2020 08:02 AM


Originally Posted by Eclipse (Post 3090929)
No, not all revenue is profit. People always guess that I'm making way more than I actually do. But you are right that I am not starving.

It doesn’t matter how much money you were making or not making, it’s none of their business. You deserved it, you worked for it!

And, indeed! Our union should be fighting to have QT back, that’s what the vast majority of the pilot group wants. Union needs to start listening to the pilot group more often, instead of saying “It’s not in the contract” Well, so let’s fight to have it in the contract. Why hasn’t AAG messed with LiteSabre? They probably don’t wanna **** their mainline pilots off, and I bet they don’t have LiteSabre in their contract, either.

pitchattitude 07-13-2020 09:14 AM


Originally Posted by Eclipse (Post 3090926)
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.

I have to agree with QT making life easier. I have never been one to pay for things I can do myself. But QT is very reasonably priced and did a number of things quicker and more easily because if nothing else, it saved filling in blanks and going back and forth between screens. Just proffering on reserve or requesting a hotel when I needed one made it worth $5 a month. The ability to sort through the reserve list is also great. Not as big of deal with so many on reserve depending where one falls on the list, but again something that illustrates its utility.

The big issue I see and have said is that Envoy took away access to QT PUNITIVELY. Had the same situation been reversed, even though it’s not in the contract, I’m certain Envoy would have considered it a change to the status quo and would have gotten an injunction against the pilots.

dera 07-13-2020 09:22 AM


Originally Posted by highfarfast (Post 3090770)
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.

I was only referring to AutoBid, my comment had nothing to do with QuickTrade. Not being prepared for AB shutdown was poor business practice.
The system still works, I think people are making it a bigger deal than what it really is.

dera 07-13-2020 09:32 AM


Originally Posted by Eclipse (Post 3090926)
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.

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.

As you know, even if we have that in our contract, AAG will not grant you DECS access without going through their approval process. So just get it done (I understand you are in process of doing so right now), and hopefully we will get QT back.

Appropriations is a bad example. The company wanted them, and that is why they were offered. The Union has no method on forcing the company to negotiate something it does not care about. The first opportunity to do so is the limited reopener later this year.
Based on some credible sources, QT does not seem to be very important for the pilot group to negotiate for.

havick206 07-13-2020 09:37 AM

It’s actually probably a good past practice case to go to arbitration with.

There’s probably plenty of evidence of the company working to make the app work etc

Eclipse 07-13-2020 09:51 AM


Originally Posted by dera (Post 3091005)
As you know, even if we have that in our contract, AAG will not grant you DECS access without going through their approval process. So just get it done (I understand you are in process of doing so right now), and hopefully we will get QT back.

Appropriations is a bad example. The company wanted them, and that is why they were offered. The Union has no method on forcing the company to negotiate something it does not care about. The first opportunity to do so is the limited reopener later this year.
Based on some credible sources, QT does not seem to be very important for the pilot group to negotiate for.

They won't approve it unless the Envoy "business unit" requests it now. So we either wait for a change of heart or use the contract to get them to request it. A limited reopener sounds like the perfect opportunity. I think most people want QT and should make it known to the union. But that's ultimately the choice Envoy crew members get to make.

UncreativeUser 07-13-2020 09:59 AM

This may be an unpopular opinion, but paying for quick trade is bull ****. Why do we have to pay 60$ per year to a guy who apparently has been bragging pre COVID about how his wife never has to work again because of QT. I think we should be focusing on getting the company to do this through CCI. CCI is the official company app, not QT. That’s in the contract. Also, pretty sure QT does cost the company money. Probably not a lot, but for ever server login there is a per user per login cost. Had AA still owned Sabre, perhaps this wouldn’t be an issue.

I used to use QT religiously and now I could care less if it comes back, and I won’t need to pay for anything.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

shinydiscoballs 07-13-2020 10:13 AM

[QUOTE=UncreativeUser;3091030]This may be an unpopular opinion, but paying for quick trade is bull ****. Why do we have to pay 60$ per year to a guy who apparently has been bragging pre COVID about how his wife never has to work again because of QT. I think we should be focusing on getting the company to do this through CCI. CCI is the official company app, not QT. That’s in the contract. Also, pretty sure QT does cost the company money. Probably not a lot, but for ever server login there is a per user per login cost. Had AA still owned Sabre, perhaps this wouldn’t be an issue.

I used to use QT religiously and now I could care less if it comes back, and I won’t need to pay for anything.

I concur with you 💯 %, the company just needs a way to make things easier for us to bid monthly lines like (smart pref) etc. Bidding lines is ancient... I also heard MH is not refunding people's money, he can go pound sand!


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:48 PM.


User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands