XJT Whipsaw
01-19-2013, 04:54 PM
#111
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2008
Posts: 326
The XJT pilots on these boards may have been saying no pbs or we will vote no. The MEC has been open minded from the get go. Don't confuse the two.
Your MEC wants to reprogram smartpref so that its now prefbid. Of course they can't do that. Its apples and oranges on how the two work. It was disingenuous for the MEC to ask for that or they are just oblivious otherwise. Smartpref has proven to work with our phase 2 bidding.
Your MEC wants to reprogram smartpref so that its now prefbid. Of course they can't do that. Its apples and oranges on how the two work. It was disingenuous for the MEC to ask for that or they are just oblivious otherwise. Smartpref has proven to work with our phase 2 bidding.
Smart Pref has not been fully proven - the pool of pilots and pairings your are currently running could be done by a any competent computer user and an excel spread sheet. Ramp it up to parallel a full bid for one of your bases and then we can see if it actually works.
The XJT MEC did not hold the line on anything dealing with this PBS issue. In fact, they provided ideas to get past this impass that didn't have a defined outcome one way or the other. The ASA MEC shot every one of them down because it didn't make sure it had an outcome of flight line for everyone. Their ultimatum led DIRECTLY to where we are now. It has NOTHING to do with the XJT MEC.
If the blastmail sent out is bashing, then you guys need to get some thicker skin. It was just a letter relaying the facts. I'm sorry that the truth is equal to bashing the ASA MEC.
One party is being reasonable and the other one isn't. Make an educated, guess, if you can, on which one it is and that will give you the answer as to why we find ourselves in the current cluster.
I just looked at the ALPA website and it shows that the MECs have agreed on all the sections of the contract. So I don't know what you are talking about. The only thing not agreed to is the PBS system. We are in this predicament only because your MEC refuses to listen to anything other than flight line. So management thinks they found away around your MEC. This has nothing to do with the XJT MEC. Personally, I'm not even against the ASA MEC being in these negotiations with some caveats. I just want all you guys to understand that this is the direct result of your MEC and management's counter to their ultimatum. We will both end up worse for it.
01-19-2013, 05:42 PM
#112
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: A320
Posts: 661
You are saying it was disingenuous to ask Smart Pref to reprogram so that it could handle CDO's? What about providing vacation conflicts? What about providing an award analysis to ensure seniority was respected?
Smart Pref has not been fully proven - the pool of pilots and pairings your are currently running could be done by a any competent computer user and an excel spread sheet. Ramp it up to parallel a full bid for one of your bases and then we can see if it actually works.
The ASA MEC is backing a proven system that receives very favorable reviews from the pilot groups who use it. What you are asking them to do is take a concession and they are unwilling.
So, if you keep shouting out a lie eventually it will come true?
One party publicly mudslinging is reasonable?
Again, this could have been resolved a year ago but there were so many sticking points where your MEC took extra time to protect your interests. Now you are crying foul when the ASA MEC is protecting the interest of their pilot group. A bit hypocritical?
Smart Pref has not been fully proven - the pool of pilots and pairings your are currently running could be done by a any competent computer user and an excel spread sheet. Ramp it up to parallel a full bid for one of your bases and then we can see if it actually works.
The ASA MEC is backing a proven system that receives very favorable reviews from the pilot groups who use it. What you are asking them to do is take a concession and they are unwilling.
So, if you keep shouting out a lie eventually it will come true?
One party publicly mudslinging is reasonable?
Again, this could have been resolved a year ago but there were so many sticking points where your MEC took extra time to protect your interests. Now you are crying foul when the ASA MEC is protecting the interest of their pilot group. A bit hypocritical?
01-19-2013, 05:48 PM
#113
Line Holder
Joined APC: May 2012
Posts: 44
Joe, the XJT MEC has said Flightline will not work for us, but we are willing to discuss ANY OTHER SYSTEM. ASA has said no. The company has said costs have gone up with flightline from even the line bidding days, they are willing to move forward with ANY OTHER PBS SYSTEM. ASA guys have said no. When ALPA national came down and put our MEC in one room and yours in another, they asked the ASA guys if they were willing to lose RFPs and possible growth oportunities if it meant standing their ground on flightline, their answer was YES. ALPA national reported back to the company saying there was nothing more to talk about, both sides stopped talking, the company requested we open up section 26 for new pay rates for larger aircraft. That IS what happened. What have I missed? What "record" needs to be "set straight"?
01-19-2013, 05:57 PM
#114
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2008
Posts: 326
The company is playing this for all it's worth to encourage whipsaw between the groups. I am honestly more concerned with their actions than continuing to promote discord between our pilot groups.
01-19-2013, 05:59 PM
#115
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2008
Posts: 326
01-19-2013, 06:23 PM
#116
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: A320
Posts: 661
The ASA MEC does not agree they have issued an ultimatum. As it stands, the ASA MEC will not drop Flightline for Smartpref. As much potential as I see in Smartpref, it is still unproven and until full base bid runs are accomplished, it is not reasonable to expect the ASA MEC to back Smartpref.
The company is playing this for all it's worth to encourage whipsaw between the groups. I am honestly more concerned with their actions than continuing to promote discord between our pilot groups.
The company is playing this for all it's worth to encourage whipsaw between the groups. I am honestly more concerned with their actions than continuing to promote discord between our pilot groups.
01-19-2013, 06:48 PM
#117
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2008
Posts: 326
BTW, the ASA MEC was willing to do parallel test runs but the company is unwilling to fund it, and Smart pref won't do it for free because the modifications to fit our work rules would have been too extensive. If this is something the XJT MEC actually wants, the burden falls on them to make it work then sell it.
01-19-2013, 06:56 PM
#118
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: A320
Posts: 1,310
I gotta say, at times reading this thread my head is spinning. I honestly have no clue who works for who anymore. It seems like both sides are bickering about the same things in opposing manners. From someone that understands compromise (for a good cause) and is not afraid of change thus not caring if my job exists when this all blows over, I think we are totally screwed.
Not just from the vibes you get from the forum regulars but from what I hear around the line, we are going in the wrong direction. We took management's bait and they are stoked Im sure.
Not just from the vibes you get from the forum regulars but from what I hear around the line, we are going in the wrong direction. We took management's bait and they are stoked Im sure.
01-19-2013, 07:10 PM
#119
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: A320
Posts: 661
It's even easier than that - expand the XJT test run to all line holders in a base and prove that it works. It's already in use, so it should be quick and easy to implement If the XJT MEC can prove that it works for an entire base of line bidders, I'll lead the educational campaign on the ASA side. I'd personally give up vacation low outright to do away with the multiple bid sheets and to know my schedule a full week earlier. But prove the program works first in a full scale real world environment!
BTW, the ASA MEC was willing to do parallel test runs but the company is unwilling to fund it, and Smart pref won't do it for free because the modifications to fit our work rules would have been too extensive. If this is something the XJT MEC actually wants, the burden falls on them to make it work then sell it.
BTW, the ASA MEC was willing to do parallel test runs but the company is unwilling to fund it, and Smart pref won't do it for free because the modifications to fit our work rules would have been too extensive. If this is something the XJT MEC actually wants, the burden falls on them to make it work then sell it.
01-20-2013, 05:52 AM
#120
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2012
Posts: 503
If it does go to arbitration the MEC nor the pilot group will have any control of the outcome.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
