Useful info. Thank you




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

What do you base your opinion on? Your vast airline experience? How many Pilots have you hired? How many MX bases have you opened?

We don't offer hiring "incentives" today but that doesn't mean we won't tomorrow. If you are hired today with no 121 experience, we are projecting it will take 18 to 20 months to upgrade. If you come here with 700 hrs. of previous 121 or more, as soon as you have 300 hrs. at PSA you will upgrade (inside a year). I look at the staffing model a couple times a week.

Is it tougher now than it was six months ago? Of course it is. Is PSA still the right choice for a pilot to come to? It depends on the individuals needs, goals and desired lifestyle. But saying the quick upgrades are over is just untrue.

You said "classes of 8 aren't getting it done". We had 150 first officers already hired in various stages of training. You have no clue what are needs are yet you offer an opinion.

Have we had growing pains? Sure we have. Will we have more? No doubt. We are in the middle of tripling the size of PSA.

The entire delivery schedule was originally predicated on Envoy not being able to retain pilots. The exodus slowed so the schedule changed. PSA does not set the delivery schedule. AA sets the schedule. Your posts just show how little you know, almost every time you post. You must have a crystal ball because it sure isn't experience talking when you post.

The entire problem with the trip trades/drops has been with the software vendor. Management wants it fixed. We believe the vendor has made a lot of progress in making it right. The run for October was much better and I'm told they expect even better performance in the future. Other airlines using this software are having the same problems.

I am confidant that PSA will be successful. I base that on 25 years experience and first hand knowledge. You certainly are entitled to your opinion.

 

4 1/2 hours to deny a single swap, late in the 24 hour SAP period (when trades should have been winding down), is not what I would call "much better".

 

Well, to his credit it's better than 8 hours.....

 

This is complete garbage. We all know the vendor is doing exactly as instructed. The number of newly created exceptions to lock people out of SAP, the companies unwillingness to pay for real computing power to handle SAP, the high number of <11 hour overnight trips to lock people out (another contract violation), the inefficient schedules with low time crap left to SAP into........management loves that they are getting away with violating the contract because it's saving them millions, screwing us out of QOL(extra bonus for them) and hiding the fact that we are barely staffed adequately other than FOs (who are leaving before IOE cause of the wait.)

This company only had fast upgrade and schedule flexibility to offer new hires. Both have been lost in the last 6 months. If management doesn't extricate their heads from their anusses, we aren't going to recruit squat and the shrinking will begin before we even achieve our growth goal. Fix SAP, fire the schedule writer guy, fix the flow (DPs cost saving tool) and quit being backwoods mom and pop baffoons.

 

Oh yeah and I don't consider it fixing SAP by having so much inefficient, low hour crap, or blocked trips in open time that no one wants to SAP. Intentionally driving down the number of requests isn't fixing the problem, it's hiding it. (Kind of like not removing names from the seniority list when people leave so we seem "adequately staffed."

 

blaming the software for what was working well, but now it doesn't? the flights get covered for less money, but MGT wants it fixed too?

sounds to me like they DID fix it already.

They tried the blaming the software thing over here too. Monkey see, monkey do management. Same bag of tricks being passed around.

nice to see you fixed the flow without concessions. a step in the right direction. Better late than never I guess. They needed it more than you. It's how they'll attract pilots to their 3 WO's.

 

Flow isn't here or "fixed" yet. It still has to be passed, and we dont know the details yet. But if it's as bad as everyone is anticipating, it will get shot down.

 

why would it get shot down if it isn't concessionary?

i know we want more, and we want it now, but sometimes the art of the deal is to take what you can get.


If we vote no, the company doesn't have to come back to the table. If we vote yes, we get something for nothing with a guarantee that they come back to the table again, (or so I have been told).

 

I wouldn't be bragging about having 150 FOs still in various stages of training that were hired back in early Spring.

Also sounds like you might be a little out of touch with what's really causing SAP to not work based on the responses of your own pilots.