KC10 FATboy

I'm not screwing anyone. People were screwed years before I got on property.

It is concessionary in the fact that management actually requires you to work ... instead of having these magical 2, 4, 6 weeks off that you speak of. You sound like the AFL-CIO telling me how bad I have it. Is it so unreasonable to actually be required to work?

Coupled with the current work rules, which could be better, I like PBS as I have control over my schedule as a junior pilot. Enough said.

757upspilot

Actually not enough said. You don't know any different than what you have. Our union isn't part of the AFL-CIO yours is and it has agreed to a concessionary contract and you still can't turn a consistant profit..

CVG767A

I really don't know what point you're trying to prove, but your beating of this drum has become tiresome. You've heard from a number of us that have worked under both types of bidding, that we like PBS better. Could we have possibly stated that any more clearly?? It works very well for us.

Would it work for you? I don't know, and I really don't care. Really. Your company doesn't even compete with mine. For those companies that do compete with mine, I'd be happy for all of them to stick with LOT bidding; it gives us a competitive advantage.

Regarding the reason your contract is better, GMAFB! I'm not really sure how long you've been at UPS, but recall that your payrates are the result of pattern bargaining, rather than your union affiliation. Due to the rise of internet commerce in recent years, you were spared from the economic storm that battered the airlines, and decimated our contract.

As KC10 stated, enough said. I'm done with this thread.

757upspilot

The original question was about PBS opposed to LOT and we have established that PBS is part of concession contracts.
I have been with UPS since the beginning so your pattern bargaining and affilation comments are funny. Typical ALPA pilot taking claim for the good and discounting your part in the race for the bottom.
Enough said, I am done with this thread.

KC10 FATboy

757UPSPilot:

Yes I lied and came back to this thread. There is a HUGE difference between UPS/FedEx who pull in billions a year in profit and the passenger airlines who even the most profitable barely squeak by.

So lets call a spade a spade here. Yes, you guys have it very good there at UPS. Your company is profitable largely because Joe Schmoe is willing to pay $35 to overnight a package across the country yet whine that they have to pay $100 bucks to fly grandma to another state. Huge difference and cost structure.

Its great when you're on top with one of the best contracts of not only pay but working conditions. But for those of us hanging on at mainline, please don't insult or try to make us feel guilty because we happen to like a QOL multiplier that is PBS.

skybolt

Yall sound like the blind men describing the elephant.

Everybody sees something from their own perspective. It would be instructive for someone to detail the evolution of pref bid.

I would like to know about companies that took PB as a part of normal negotiations, and also about companies that had PB forced on them either in bankruptcy and concessionary bargaining.

The info I have says, that companies that negotiated PB outside of bankruptcy, are happy and groups that had PB forced on them hate it.

I would also like to know of your experiences with the various PB software systems.

Thanks in advance

grumman

Pretty funny. I know I guy....

say that again

I wasn't going to wade in here but the IPA may have missed the boat when it comes to PBS. It was presented to us during the last round of contract talks and the company wanted it badly. They wanted it bad enough that we could have gotten some very nice rules to go along with PBS, enough to negate the negative effects on manning. However it was received so poorly by the pilot group that it was deep sixed from the get go. Given enough rules, PBS can be a win for the pilot group. I am in the top 7% of the seniority list and I've been here since the beginning of the airline. I know that PBS can work but the time has come and gone with regards to the company wanting it badly enough to give us the rules needed to make it palatable to the membership. Our leverage is greatly weakened now.

alfaromeo

I think the key is to negotiate to have the pilots retain some control over the process. They should be involved in the selection of the software and retain some measure of control over the implementation, including monthly review of bids. Delta negotiated our PBS in the pre-bankruptcy deal, so we were had enough leverage to keep this control. Since our original PBS implementation we have added many new features at the pilots' request and the product just gets better. Delta uses the most current version of Navtech software.

Herkflyr

Think of PBS like a razor-sharp knife: used correctly, with proper knowledge and respect for what it can and should (or should not) do, it can be a very valuable, and even essential tool.

Used incorrectly, haphazardly, etc., it can cause severe pain and damage.

At DAL we have had what most would conclude is a successful experience. The reasons below are why.

1. Our concessionary agreement that called for PBS in the first place (back in 2005) also called for a 3-person PBS Working Group. This was three line pilots who were paid company-paid trip drops (for months) to work with the company on vendor interviews, and ultimately, vendor selection.

2. The LOA stated that the choice of PBS vendor would be a joint ALPA/company decision. This was unlike our earlier experience with PBS, down at our MCO-based Delta Express operation (1996-mid 2000s), where the company bought an off-the-shelf product, gave it almost zero support, and told the pilots, "here you are, sink or swim, and good luck."

3. Every month, we have several line pilots man the "PBS help desk" to answer any and all PBS questions. Note the fact that it is line pilots--NOT company scheduling--that man the help desk. No crew scheduling sort could understand all the unique factors that may go into a particular pilot's preference set, from commuting issues, military leave, etc. The help desk guys are also paid company-paid (not ALPA) trip drops to do it.

4. Every PBS result is subject to the approval of the PBS committee. Sometimes certain categories will have several runs rejected by the committee before an acceptable one is finally agreed upon.

Do you see my point here? You simply MUST have strong pilot oversight of the process. You can not have a system where the company chooses the vendor, arbitrarily chooses whatever run parameters they want, and then sticks the pilots with the results without any pilot input or "right of first refusal".

If you do have all that (like here at DAL), you can actually have a good experience overall that benefits both the pilots and the company.