I recently upgraded so I really don't have the experience to speak about SAP currently, but prior to upgrade I had pretty much given up using it as it was borderline useless. I would put in 15-20 requests every 6 hours and they wouldn't process in anything less than 6-8 hours. The last SAP was super effective, 6 hours after it closed my last trades finished processing. So, hearing that its 4 hours on average now sounds like an improvement, but still a debacle.

 

You have to have the balls to walk away from the table as well. Why would we vote in something with low numbers when we know they will be back next year asking for help with staffing. You don't have to take whatever you can get in negotiations. If you're buying a house and can't find what you want, are you gonna buy the shack and just say oh well maybe next year? No, you'll wait it out. If it sucks then walk away and the company will come back to us. Don't vote yes just because it's something. Vote for what it should be.

 

This.

Doesn't sound like many are too optimistic in it being anything worth voting on.

 

No one is optimistic about anything our union does. I can only think of 3 reps that I actually respect and know for a fact that bust their a$$ for the pilots. Outside those guys, the rest of the union is expected by the pilots to be weak now. And I don't like saying this either, I really hate to talk about the union this way. But it's the truth and I don't know of many pilots who feel much differently.

 

What do you brag about?

My observation is you have little knowledge/experience/skill but want to tell others what to do.

I don't know you other than the constant ignorant negative post and you haven't answered any direct inquiry.

Are you someone who I or others would consider successful and look to for advice?

Feel free to list in generic terms any qualifying success/credentials.


If not go work on you an please stop the negative ignorance; leave room for others to post "useful PSA" items.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Does anyone else find this statement incredibly ironic?

 

I think we should vote for what it should be but I think the pilot group needs to be realistic about what it should be. Not that I think we should get any less than Envoy or Piedmont but we also have to realize it's not possible for us to get an equal amount right now. For us to say ok to a slight increase now with terms to increase more later when we can flow more might be the best option. I think our focus should be more the guarantee of it increasing in th near future when we are staffed and when envoys flow decreases rather than shooting down some thing that isn't a huge increase right off the bat. Our growth and staffing issues just don't allow for a big increase to work. Every one should go into it with an open mind because we don't even know the details yet rather than saying they'll vote it down if it's not if its not a huge increase.

 

If the language in the TA says the company MUST come back in a year and MUST agree to more then you're right. If those are agreements set in stone then I'll agree with you. Management won't honor anything it says unless they have to. So unless the language is in there binding them to come back and increase it, then you'd be shooting yourself in the foot by voting yes.

 

It's real simple.

If they are offering an improvement without having to exchange anything for the improvement then it should be voted in.

If they are offering something in trade for something else, ie net gain 0, then it should be voted down. Just let nature take its course. ie they'll be back when they can't staff the place.

I certainly wouldn't stress about it though, its a real simple decision.

Personally, I think flow is stupid. All it does is drag out a miserable regional existence. The focus should be the destruction of regional airlines, the destruction of alpa at regionals. I wish people could smarten up and see this but pilots are really not that bright. It's not their fault though, they don't know any better. I mean think about it, who are your role models? Other pilots. This is why the company can walk all over you, they are smarter than you are.

 

So somehow it's going to be possible for PDT to triple in size and staff their flying with a bigger chunck of AA classes filled by flow but simpleton PSA won't be able to manage it? PDT has a negotiated increase of flow as their numbers increase but we should just accept what we can get for the year? This is just more typical crap of management not seeing the forest for the trees and being difficult because they have a serious case of little man syndrome. They need to get over their oversized ego and come to terms with the fact that we will never reach our target size or hire 1000 pilots over the next 24 months if they don't make some serious corrections or actually honor the contract. I can only think of a couple ways I might actually vote yes on this; 1. a large increase in flows now or 2. a defined table of increases that has us at 10% now with increases up to 15 a month once we reach 1500. Flow is a critical need for management, not the pilot group. This is their crap storm to clean up.