Originally Posted by Tony Nelson

"Reserve is a choice."

Originally Posted by baseball

The pilots never got to see the rules or what PBS was until after the MEC's vote. Why not another vote on PBS? You can't do something this big, without the pilots seeing it and actually voting on it. And, yes, this was an ALPA contract.

Originally Posted by baseball

Simple: when ALPA negotiated the post merger contract, PBS was in it. The same PBS that ALPA agreed to under the Legacy CAL contract, known as Piece of Shtt 02. Alpa had plenty of opportunities to learn the good, the bad, and the ugly of PBS. Instead of learning honest lessons about the failures of PBS, the PBS committee, fully staffed with Pro-PBS system computer people put PBS ahead of the pilot group. They saw only the company's point of view, and bought into it hook, line and sinker. Management continually talked it up, even when failures occurred, and got ALPA to play along. ALPA pilot reps were staffed into the PBS committee to essentially facilitate it.

PBS was sold to CAL pilots as a "concession." There was a cash value associated with its implementation. The company wanted concessions from pilots. Some of those concessions came from work rules, some of those work rules (most of them), are buried inside the PBS rule-sets, some in other places. Dollar amount assigned. Then, another set of dollars associated with implementation of PBS, and elimination of the 10 percent reserve compliment on each fleet. Result: fewer pilots, roughly 400 pilot jobs lost post PBS. ALPA simply agreed to it in POS 02, and then in a post merger contract, and then in a contract extension.

I would love for ALPA to see PBS as the glass half empty instead of it as half full for its pilots. Take a more protective approach with honoring the seniority of our pilots. My question is this: What can, and should be ALPA's role in protecting and preserving our seniority when it counts most?

For me, my quality of life is a direct product of the scheduling process. This process comes from bidding. If the scheduling system or process produces results that water down the seniority, then the system is broken.

For pilots, we should stop calling "preferential" bidding system. My preference is for it to honor seniority. Instead we should call it butts in seats, because really all it is is a known conflict deconfliction system. PBS just recognizes and identifies all known staffing conflicts and eliminates them. Then and only then does it crunch. However, it will never work they way they want? Why? unscheduled or unknown sick leave, pop up training, missed training events, and late notice military leave. No way to plan for everything, so PBS can't be run too lean and mean.

I think people meant well when they implemented PBS, but it would have had a different outcome and thought process if the committee were staffed by over 60 senior Captains, instead of a bunch of under 30 computer programming first officers who think they can solve every problem ever devised with cobalt and fortran. Not all problems deserve a solution, and not all pilots need pilots solving them. We gave in on the concessions to easy, too early, and too often, and ultimately we never got a fair shake on how much PBS really did save the company. Not enough dollars given credit for in the concessions.

Also, the MEC at the time was way too lenient with management and totally non-confrontational. Even when the company was throwing softballs begging us to hit one over, we simply laid down a bunt and played it safe.

ALPA didn't have to sign that contract.....

Originally Posted by 757Driver

Actually they did get to see it and as you so sagely point out, it was blank. As a matter of fact there were a few more TBD sections in that contract that were basically blank.

Who in their right mind would ever vote yes to blank sections in their contract? Oh yeah, the majority of former CAL Pilots would.

Originally Posted by JoePatroni

It didn’t help that Stivala was telling blatant lies at roadshow after roadshow.

Originally Posted by 757Driver

Who in their right mind would ever vote yes to blank sections in their contract? Oh yeah, the majority of former CAL Pilots would.

Originally Posted by baseball

Not sure why ALPA allowed that to be voted on. If it was incomplete, blank, or missing, as a point of order, wouldn't that simply be "out of order," and therefore not legal to vote on?