|
We're expected to be at peak performance every time we show for work. That's why we're evaluated twice a year in the sim, twice a year at the doctors office, once a year on the line and occasionally random checks by the faa. If your not at peak performance, don't be in my cockpit, call in sick or fatigued. Simple.
|
Originally Posted by Full pull
(Post 2124157)
We're expected to be at peak performance every time we show for work. That's why we're evaluated twice a year in the sim, twice a year at the doctors office, once a year on the line and occasionally random checks by the faa. If your not at peak performance, don't be in my cockpit, call in sick or fatigued. Simple.
|
To add to Red Letter's, busdriver12's and Full Pull's great advice (as compared to the very bad advice of excersising care when calling in sick/fatigued) - if the company were to harass a pilot for using sick time and/or calling in fatigued, not only would the union get involved, so would the FAA. It is illegal.
It is so simple. You're sick, call in sick. You're fatigued, call in fatigued. We can be our own worst enemies in self induced pilot-pushing. |
Originally Posted by Full pull
(Post 2124157)
We're expected to be at peak performance every time we show for work. That's why we're evaluated twice a year in the sim, twice a year at the doctors office, once a year on the line and occasionally random checks by the faa. If your not at peak performance, don't be in my cockpit, call in sick or fatigued. Simple.
I've read a bunch of crap over the years on the site. THIS IS THE WINNER. Dumbest post ever. FP, please go away. |
Originally Posted by Rock
(Post 2123944)
For obvious reasons, you won't understand this, but every time I read one of your grunts on APC, I'm reminded of walking by a drunk homeless guy who is yelling incoherently at passersby. For just a couple seconds I wonder what he's trying to say. Then I realize he probably doesn't even know, and I move on.
Just block Anthrax's posts Rock. |
Originally Posted by golfandfly
(Post 2123735)
People make a huge deal over PBS. I worked at a legacy carrier that had it. Sorry, but it wasn't a big deal. Seniority ruled, and many times you had better lines than you have now. Instead of someone else building lines, you built them yourselves. I hear guys saying that they can't get a full month off on vacation months and that sort of thing, then they sell back their vacations and work 20 days that month anyway. I'd much rather have our current system, but it has it's price too. There may be guys that complain then sell it back, but I sure hope your attitude towards PBS doesn't spread. I've never heard ANYONE speak of PBS dismissively like this, either at Fedex or other carriers who have it- in fact the opposite. They advise to fight it like mad. I believe it's a HUGE deal and hope you do too. It is imperative we keep the OPTION of scheduling our vacations and then working every other day, or just taking it and having the enormous flexibility we have now. I will fight tooth and nail to prevent PBS, for what my one opinion and vote matters, rather than have one day vacation for one day off. We spend enough time away from home as it is. Never mind the trust it would take to work under that system. |
Originally Posted by golfandfly
(Post 2123735)
People make a huge deal over PBS. I worked at a legacy carrier that had it. Sorry, but it wasn't a big deal. Seniority ruled, and many times you had better lines than you have now. Instead of someone else building lines, you built them yourselves. I hear guys saying that they can't get a full month off on vacation months and that sort of thing, then they sell back their vacations and work 20 days that month anyway. I'd much rather have our current system, but it has it's price too.
Just compare the options available to a line-holder with a 7-day vacation with those available to someone with the same vacation and a secondary line. Junior pilots with carryover or training can manage their conflicts to occasionally allow selection of better trips - that ain't happening with PBS. Friends at UAL bidding in the bottom half of their seat used to describe the utter futility in even attempting to bid for a few extra days off. The top half of the list got average to above average numbers of days off per month. By the time they got to the bottom half of the list, there was so much flying left that everyone had to be maxed out just to cover it. As lean as FedEx mans this place, you don't think that would be a problem here? Our system is far from perfect, but extrapolating your experience at a pax carrier with a mature PBS program (and likely a vacation system unlike ours) isn't valid. |
Originally Posted by Adlerdriver
(Post 2124477)
I have to second BlackKnight's comments. If you truly believe PBS isn't a "big deal", then it's hard to believe you really have a complete understanding of what it would change in our current system.
Just compare the options available to a line-holder with a 7-day vacation with those available to someone with the same vacation and a secondary line. Junior pilots with carryover or training can manage their conflicts to occasionally allow selection of better trips - that ain't happening with PBS. Friends at UAL bidding in the bottom half of their seat used to describe the utter futility in even attempting to bid for a few extra days off. The top half of the list got average to above average numbers of days off per month. By the time they got to the bottom half of the list, there was so much flying left that everyone had to be maxed out just to cover it. As lean as FedEx mans this place, you don't think that would be a problem here? Our system is far from perfect, but extrapolating your experience at a pax carrier with a mature PBS program (and likely a vacation system unlike ours) isn't valid. However, just like anything else, it has a price. Unlike many of you, I've worked under PBS. If that is United's current system, it isn't a well implemented program. Our current secondary line system is an example of a poorly designed system. Don't get me wrong here, PBS maximizes efficiency for the company. Less pilots required. Most PBS systems work like this: pairings are built, just like they are now. Pilots (in seniority order) select the pairings they want, the days off they want, cities, TAFB, length of pairings, min blg, max blg, etc. You aren't able to knock out a full month on vacation. You work around your vacation that you could slide. Vacation takes up time from your monthly Blg or you get greedy and don't count it (much like our current secondary line holders). The company would have no need for secondary lines as this is already worked in the process. This requires quite a few less pilots and is more efficient for the company. As I've said, I've worked under this system. I've heard these horror stories about it. While I much prefer our current system, I'd listen to an offer. 20% raise? I don't know... I have more issues with the pairings than anything else. They have really got worse over the last 10 years. PBS doesn't have to effect pairing design... |
Personally there's almost no raise that'd persuade me to vote for PBS. Certainly none that I believe Fedex would offer. Again your sentiments concern me. Money isn't everything, especially if you're too wiped out to "enjoy" it. Time off to enjoy life, family and friends is always what counts in the long run.
One of my friends that rails against PBS is at United now. He has nothing but severe contempt, and he's one of the smartest guys and best pilots I know. I know you're saying you prefer our system. But then you once again state examples, and give me several impressions that you'd be willing to entertain it. The efficiency would shove everyone backwards, top load seniority and screw the bottom half at least, and destroy the vacation system. Terrible idea for a few bucks and a bit of bidding preference. Not trying to pig pile on you bud, but I sure hope you're in a very small minority at FedEx re: opening the door for PBS. |
Originally Posted by golfandfly
(Post 2124499)
As I said, I prefer our current system.
However, just like anything else, it has a price. Unlike many of you, I've worked under PBS. If that is United's current system, it isn't a well implemented program. Our current secondary line system is an example of a poorly designed system. Don't get me wrong here, PBS maximizes efficiency for the company. Less pilots required. Most PBS systems work like this: pairings are built, just like they are now. Pilots (in seniority order) select the pairings they want, the days off they want, cities, TAFB, length of pairings, min blg, max blg, etc. You aren't able to knock out a full month on vacation. You work around your vacation that you could slide. Vacation takes up time from your monthly Blg or you get greedy and don't count it (much like our current secondary line holders). The company would have no need for secondary lines as this is already worked in the process. This requires quite a few less pilots and is more efficient for the company. As I've said, I've worked under this system. I've heard these horror stories about it. While I much prefer our current system, I'd listen to an offer. 20% raise? I don't know... I have more issues with the pairings than anything else. They have really got worse over the last 10 years. PBS doesn't have to effect pairing design... Please explain what you mean/how your bolded statement above can be accomplished. I am not aware of any way of doing that. :confused: Regardless, I am a big NO for PBS. Of course our Secondary Lines suck!! Mainly because the company is using a first generation PBS system and apparently loves it (and the loss of goodwill that goes with it). :( . |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:07 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands