![]() |
Originally Posted by awax
(Post 2325577)
Your posts are like Trumps tweets - full of emotion and hyperbole and short on facts. It's gotta feel pretty good to be you, huh?
|
Originally Posted by awax
(Post 2325577)
Your posts are like Trumps tweets - full of emotion and hyperbole and short on facts. It's gotta feel pretty good to be you, huh?
Can you say "denial mode"? I knew you could. No emotion or English-language trickery there bubba, just plain ole, no bread- and butter, no grits and bacon, just slap-ya-mamma honest to goodness truth sandwich. have a bite buddy, and pucker up and get a good lip smacking smootchie-smootch. PBS SUX. Good day. |
Originally Posted by awax
(Post 2325577)
Your posts are like Trumps tweets - full of emotion and hyperbole and short on facts. It's gotta feel pretty good to be you, huh?
Just to point you back to the original concept you obviously thought was a trump tweet of some sort................BAH HUMBUG. How can you say that the program called PBS isn't a company management and staffing tool? That's what the heck it is dude. It's not a pilot centered and focused and controlled scheduling optimization tool. it's a company (MANAGEMENT) controlled and administered staffing and seat filling software program that was outsourced to a third party vendor.....No emotion there. IT's very factual. Not sure how/why you don't understand that. Do you have some sort of PBS agenda or something? |
Originally Posted by baseball
(Post 2326139)
Just to point you back to the original concept you obviously thought was a trump tweet of some sort................BAH HUMBUG.
Originally Posted by baseball
(Post 2325268)
We as pilots (as well as ALPA) have no input on staffing. Therefore, it doesn't matter how smart you are.
Now, go read Section 1, 5, and 8 (for starters) of the current CBA. Maybe you've heard terms like "scope choke" (section 1), or "duty day" (section 5), or section 8 which is actually titled "STAFFING". The entire CBA is chocked FULL of little nuggets that directly affect pilot staffing. As for PBS, its far form perfect but for a guy like me who's about 30% BES, I get my first bid group awarded every single month. I don't say that to brag because I'm the farthest thing from a PBS expert. But, I do have a functional understanding of how the program works and know what I can hold given my BES seniority. I'd suggest that any pilot who fails to learn the program, or makes unrealistic requests will be disappointed. Even the number one guy in BES can input an illegal bid and learn about completion mode the hard way. PBS is far from perfect, it needs to be predictable and transparent. Any future changes to PBS won't remove the responsibility for each pilot to know how the program works, and make realistic monthly bids. |
Originally Posted by awax
(Post 2326227)
As for PBS, its far form perfect but for a guy like me who's about 30% BES, I get my first bid group awarded every single month. . The reality is that the union has very little ACTUAL CONTROL. If it did, the union would be able to mandate that PBS honor seniority. We have no problem honoring seniority when it comes to vacancy bids, displacement bids, and vacation bids. But, when it comes to monthly scheduling, seniority is not a mandatory absolute right given to the pilots. We have had over a dozen meltdowns at both CAL and UAL with PBS. |
Most pilots are too lazy to learn how to bid... thats the real problem.
|
Originally Posted by baseball
(Post 2326271)
The reality is that the union has very little ACTUAL CONTROL. If it did, the union would be able to mandate that PBS honor seniority.
ACTUAL CONTROL, you mean like the $60 million in grievance awards - in March alone? |
Originally Posted by svergin
(Post 2324430)
One that doesn't take 5 days to put out the FO bids for starters.
I know let's do it this way; just allow the computer to make one run and then publish the results. Then let the buyer beware and individual pilot sort through the list of results and see if they got screwed or not. If so let the results be grieved and sent to the system board for review two months later. I'd say for most the five day wait has proven to be far less costly than letting the chips fall where they may. |
Originally Posted by Regularguy
(Post 2327467)
OK do you really want to fly with Captain **** or is it worth the sort and verification that your no-fly list actually gets considered.
I know let's do it this way; just allow the computer to make one run and then publish the results. Then let the buyer beware and individual pilot sort through the list of results and see if they got screwed or not. If so let the results be grieved and sent to the system board for review two months later. I'd say for most the five day wait has proven to be far less costly than letting the chips fall where they may. Schedules so late in the month are a very real problem. One that should be addressed along with not honoring seniority and others. I for one am not willing to just sit and accept a sub standard product. Along with these problems, the PBS gurus seem to be drinking the koolaid. They essentially say that this is the way the system works, suck it up and learn the system. It should not be working this way. I have learned the system. When you finally figure out how it works, you way to yourself, why in the world did we accept this POS? |
Originally Posted by Dave Fitzgerald
(Post 2327487)
I believe the points made were as examples of why the system is not a very good one. Why does it take so long? Because the vendor and UAL are too cheap to improve the system. That won't happen till we make it a priority at ALPA.
Schedules so late in the month are a very real problem. One that should be addressed along with not honoring seniority and others. I for one am not willing to just sit and accept a sub standard product. Along with these problems, the PBS gurus seem to be drinking the koolaid. They essentially say that this is the way the system works, suck it up and learn the system. It should not be working this way. I have learned the system. When you finally figure out how it works, you way to yourself, why in the world did we accept this POS? 20-B-1-c – Preferencing will close not later than the 18th of the month prior to the subject month, unless a later date is established by mutual agreement with the System Schedule Committee. Lineholder awards will be published by the 20th or the end of the 2nd day after closing, whichever is later, and secondary lines and reserve lines will be published by the 24th, or the end of the 6th day after closing, whichever is later. How many of our pilots would like to go back to that line building? |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:02 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands