On the 175 that's not possible because the average segment length is so much longer than Piedmonts.

Unless they go with Jepp (which they won't because of their pricing), they will still use the same pairing generator so the trips themselves won't suddenly become any better.
With rigs they will just build the pairings with turns front and back of the trip, so no more 1-2-2-1 flying on the heavy, effectively making every trip non-commutable. This would also increase productivity by a lot and reduce staffing requirements. This can be protected inside the work rules since commutability is a metric they already measure, it just has to be bargained inside the LOA.
Unless protected by the LOA, PBS can also remove the day trip lines. (eg. set max monthly credit to 85 and max days off to 18 and boom, here's your lost day in GRK to fill up your day trips).

PBS is all about work rules, it can be great, or it can destroy the little QOL Envoy still has.
A Nancy Pelosi PBS is a scary thought.

Too late
they MEC ratified significant changes to both work rules and compensation in spite of the by-laws clear intent.

Per the bylaws LOA’s aren’t subject to pilot ratification.

Do you get any flight time credit for when you sit ready reserve day at the airport? (Example you sit airport ready reserve for 8 hours, you don’t get used, you get paid 5 hours toward your 75 monthly guarantee)?

Did you get a minimum flight time for your trip based on a on a per day (Example: All 1 day trips are worth a minimum of 5 hrs, 2-day worth 10 hrs, 3-day 15-hrs, etc)

Envoy posted this on their website

It s like I can see the future.

It doesn't matter who you vote in as reps. They re all the same.

The by-law states that significant changes to work rules or compensation require a pilot vote.
they are playing fast and loose with the word “significant.”
it does not specify the format, LOA, TA, AIP, side letter….. the standard is significant change to rules or compensation

the abuse of that language like this essentially means you are never entitled to a pilot vote unless they feel like it.

now, it’s entirely possible they changed the by-laws.. but that’s a pretty big deal and there isn’t anything I’ve seen in meeting minutes.

Page 47 of the ALPA Policy Manual, "Membership Ratification apply to contracts only and will not apply to Letters of Understanding (LOU) or Letters of Agreement (LOA)"

So the MEC members followed the language in the manual. If the membership is unhappy then they need to change the manual.

The Envoy By-Laws can supersede the ALPA national policy manual. Here’s how…. An MEC can be more restrictive if it chooses. Get the Envoy By-laws and look it up

I think you’ll be surprised

All this is even more motivation to get out. I don’t want to see what PBS implementation feels like. Management must be feeling pleasantly surprised how easy this was, and optimistic getting a killer PBS system to realize true efficiencies not far away on the horizon. Perfect timing for when the airline is truly staffed 30% less. Those left behind will be truly miserable. I’m tired of anyone who says PBS can be a good thing and golden days are awesome. The statement is true, but naive to think it will be true at ENY. Negotiating a strong protection in PBS for QOL is just not realistic given past histories. It’s a complicated thing, and I hope we are hiring experts to figure this out. Short of that, we are hosed. If we don’t like the negotiated PBS, can we keep voting that down? Or is this train coming no matter what it looks like?

not surprised how a rep is going straight to AA as they get this singed super fast. Obviously management is celebrating. Only ones drinking the cool aid are the FO’s who get CA pay for the time being.