Me neither. The more scope recapture at the legacies the BETTER

Not sure what you're taking about, that got canned a long time ago.

 

My money says there's going to be a HUGE reduction of 50 seat jets...

 

Why do I get the sense that you personally want bad things to happen to the ERJ guys? Would it make you happy to see people out of work and on the street and not able to support themselves only so you can say "I told you so?" Nobody on this side of the fence wants anything bad to happen to anyone. I'm going to venture out and say that your side of the fence probably feels the same way too. As a matter of fact, an overwhelming majority of guys I work with have always wanted a JCBA done so we can realize the full cost benefits of the merger and move forward.

Seems like many of your opinions stem from a tainted vision of what most of us on the other side of the fence are really like. Lay off the pipe and realize that the vocal minority you see on the internet and hear about from other people is only what it is and nothing more - A vocal minority. A very small one too.

And to be quite honest with you, a huge reduction in 50 seaters probably wouldn't hurt our company as bad as you seem to think it will. Our CPA with L-Cal puts our company in a good position to secure future replacement flying. That's why Inc wanted us in the first place. Plus, look what's happening to your side of the fence - Yes, a net loss of airplanes but we're finding work for some 200's (AA deal) and exchanging 200's for 700's/900's.

Troll on...

 

You're misunderstanding what I'm saying. You said our MEC wants to keep line bidding. I said that I didn't think that is true.

Anyway, that's not how roll call votes work but I'm sure you know that the MECs aren't combined until after a single list.

 

XJT MEC Alert
September 23, 2012

Recently the ASA MEC sent out PBS White Paper outlining the results of their research on PBS. There is a lot of good information about both systems and we respect their right to do what they feel is best for their pilots. However, there is some inaccurate and misleading information and we feel the need to clear it up for our pilots who have seen the paper.

As we have previously stated in our own research, we were able to do parallel bid runs with our line bidding system, ASA’s Flightline system and Crewing Solutions’ SmartPref system. We conducted those tests with the same pairings across each system to determine the advantages and disadvantages of each. To date, the ASA group has not conducted the same testing. The programming of the ASA test environment in SmartPref was not fully completed when they abandoned their testing. Although we respect their opinion, we are at a loss to determine how they were able to evaluate a system without actually using it to see the results.

Most importantly, the White Paper commentary is comparing a system with negotiated work rules to a system that is the base model without any work rules. From the beginning we have stated many times that a system is only as good as the work rules negotiated. Comparing a system with zero rules programmed to a system with contractual enhancements is not a true comparison at all.

Finally, the SmartPref product by Crewing Solutions does have a customer. They have an agreement with ExpressJet Airlines. We will use this product to enhance that quality of life for our phase 2 pilots and gather further information on PBS and how it COULD enhance all of our quality of life WITH the proper work rules. The SmartPref system has the capability to achieve desired results – for the pilots AND the Company. In furtherance of that goal, we will be in the EWR crew room again next week on Tuesday demonstrating and training for the upcoming roll out of SmartPref in phase 2.



Air Line Pilots Association, International
Air Line Pilots Association, International

If you wish to unsubscribe, please click here to login and update your Standard Mailings/E-Mail Distribution Lists preferences.

 

Let 's just stay separate....Obviously we are at an impass.

Your system doesn't work for us and our system doesn't work for you. Sorry, but we aren't rolling over on this....

 

BECAUSE THAT IS NEGOTIATING!!!! How can you go from telling us to get on board with negotiating when you basically outline how your MEC is refusing to negotiate????? Are you even reading what you are writing?

The company DOES NOT want your current PBS software. The projected benefits of your system did not materialize and it is not saving them money. We would have to give (use negotiating capital) somewhere else in the contract to get your software approved by the company. Even if we keep that software the parameters would be changed by the new scheduling section.... It will be a completely different system under the new contract. So that is great that you like what you have now but the company has made it clear that it needs to change going forward. These are the facts... you are getting your information from very senior people who are trying to protect their 1-10% of the seniority list. Our MEC is looking at the realistic 50+% that need to ratify this turd.

We moved off of line bidding which has worked for 20 years here, under line bidding we are cheaper per block hour vs competing airlines L-ASA included, we have a system in place that awards our schedules two weeks earlier then L-ASA, and we have a system that allows the pilot to trade and adapt their schedule for a better QOL at all seniority levels. We have given in this negotiation but doing a half assed report and saying "nope still not budging" isn't good enough.

It is a negotiation and your representation on the ASA MEC is acting like this is little timmy's first time eating vegetables.

 

That's understandable. I respect the fact you guys like your system and won't roll over, it's just the way some people go about things that really makes me scratch my head. I understand its equally frustrating on both sides, but hey it's a merger I don't think anyone expected it to go seamless....

 

Well then see you in bankruptcy... without each other we cannot compete against our smaller, less senior competitors. That is why XJT was bought. There are a lot of lifers on both sides that are going to sink this ship over .02% of this contract language. This is a negotiation and saying "nope won't do it" is not the way to get the best overall deal.

 

With all due respect, sir, you have no idea what you're talking about.

The only problem management has with our current PBS is the vacation low section, which a little birdie told me has already been "adjusted".

The fact is, that management openly stated in negotiations that they don't really care which PBS we use as long as its one or the other. They have emphatically stated that your current line bidding isn't an option.

Everything else you said is fluff.