Flight Attendants' Voices Heard: Hell No!

[BoeingBoy]

What jumped out at me is the system is automated which means it has some type of software that runs it. It's supposedly secure and can't be tweaked by Management. Bear in mind this is the same crack IT Team that gave you the Res Migration and compromised secure data, Do you really think that Management can't "play" with the software to achieve certain outcomes beneficial to it and not F/A's? Secondly do you trust management not to intervene by tweaking the software unbeknownst to you?

You may be talking about two different things, SH. US doesn't write the software - it's purchased from a vendor who specializes in such products. Having said that, there are some parameters that can be "tweaked" since each carrier using a specific vendor's softward may have different needs.

It's the second of those two that could cause problems. The answer is to have the parameters defined by contract or agreement between the union and company, then "trust but verify" as Reagan said. The union has to continuously monitor the end product of the software (in this case the awarding of monthly bids) to insure that no monkey business is occurring. Like so many things in a unionized environment governed by contracts, just approving the initial implementation and then assuming it works properly after that means that the union isn't doing it's job. It's no different than crime. Passing a law and assuming people will abide by it isn't enough - you still need the cops to catch those who break the law.

Jim

 

[Glucose Intolerant]

Who do you think you work for? Maybe if you worked for one of the big boys, United or Delta, you could realistcly ask for that stuff but you work for US Airways.

Who do you work for?

 

[Move2CLT]

SparrowHawk is right. The PBS is something the company can control. Go back to the drawing Board or don't accept it.

Couple issues here.

First, you said SH is right. He's been wrong about anything pertaining to aviation and he especially has no clue about PBS.

PBS is complex and no one outside of flightcrew should have either an interest or say on the topic. Why SH continues to add his drivel is beyond me. The fact that he thinks IT has anything to do with PBS shows just how clueless he is.

Please ignore him.

Second, what does "go back to the drawing board" mean? There are a few vendors out there who write the software and an airline picks all the options it wants.

The contract parameters are plugged in and you're off. The company has minimal interaction with the software after that so it doesn't control anything.

Get a clue first before you start crying wolf

 

[SparrowHawk]

How much first-hand experience do you or SH have with PBS?

I have NO first hand experience with PBS software. I am however a SME on document management software and am well versed in how software works in general. In most prepackaged software there is an <Admin mode> that allows the Systems Administrator the opportunity to alter parameters, personal information. "In Theory" an administrator could implement the NIC award Seniority List without pilot knowledge. Now any responsible company is going to have both security features enabled to prevent those types of thing from happening, along with tracking information as to who logged one for how long etc etc. Without Union oversight you have to decide how much you trust the company. Do I think they'd monkey with it to save a few dollars? Honestly no.

PBS only creates schedules within the boundaries of the contract. Even within that, it can only build schedules that can reliably be worked or 1)the system crashes when it's trying to build them and/or 2) scheduling runs out of reserves covering for too-tight schedules.

See above

Don't fear PBS, fear a lousy contract.

Better yet, don't act out of fear.

Most accurate comment I've seen in a while.

 

[EastUS1]

You may be talking about two different things, SH. US doesn't write the software - it's purchased from a vendor who specializes in such products. Having said that, there are some parameters that can be "tweaked" since each carrier using a specific vendor's softward may have different needs.

It's the second of those two that could cause problems. The answer is to have the parameters defined by contract or agreement between the union and company, then "trust but verify" as Reagan said. The union has to continuously monitor the end product of the software (in this case the awarding of monthly bids) to insure that no monkey business is occurring. Like so many things in a unionized environment governed by contracts, just approving the initial implementation and then assuming it works properly after that means that the union isn't doing it's job. It's no different than crime. Passing a law and assuming people will abide by it isn't enough - you still need the cops to catch those who break the law.

Jim

Very well stated. As is always the case with presumed contractual intent, versus actual implementation: "The Devil is in the details". When faced with a management that's produced such an utterly astounding track record of unresolved/stalled grievances....well...reasonable caution certainly seems prudent, as any/all parameters that can indeed be "tweaked", are, over time, very likely to be twisted about.

 

[Move2CLT]

Your grievances are unresolved for one reason and one reason only: TP.

She's so much an issue that Steve Johnson referred to her as a problem child publically at the ALC.

Blame her for sitting on them.

And watch how fast she transfers those grievances once Hummel removes her from the GC.

 

[EastUS1]

Your grievances are unresolved for one reason and one reason only: TP.

Blame her for sitting on them.

The grievances concerned are, amazingly enough to you I'll assume, hardly limited to pilot issues. I find myself again forced to wonder; Does management issue pom poms, knee pads and chap stick to the mindlessly supportive "faithful", or do you have to buy them at personal expense?

 

[Move2CLT]

Those 400 grievances sit because TP lets them sit.

And I too find myself forced to wonder if east guys surrender their common sense in ground school or after IOE.

 

[EastUS1]

Those 400 grievances ....

...are pilot matters, and hardly the extent of the various work groups' issues..and...should you ever afford them the courtesy of even noting it; this thread is about the FA group.

 

[signals]

...are pilot matters, and hardly the extent of the various work groups' issues..and...should you ever afford them the courtesy of even noting it; this thread is about the FA group.

That is no way to talk to Capt. God Almighty 🙄

 

[Phoenix]

Have you not been paying attention to the news? Activists are out there trying to determine what people can and cannot eat instead of letting people freely choose. They want to increase taxes on products they don't like or outright ban food choices that many of us grew up eating in this country. Here's just one story where a school determined that a lunch packed by a parent wasn't up to their standards.
Food Police
And what was in her lunch box? Well it was very harmful things like a turkey sandwich, a banana, potato chips and apple juice. Oh the horror of sending a kid to school with a lunch like that!

BTW, I was born in Detroit and my favorite aunt lives there so thanks for sending me on vacation. Gee, I guess letting other people decide how I should live my life isn't so bad after all.

Still waiting for you to simply make a toast to the FAs for choosing what they wanted... do you have it in you? Just one toast... Just one.. :wub:

 

[res_me]

Nice job, FA's!!!!

Why?

 

[john john]

Why?

Because they will end up with better pay and benefits than you

 

[ebwgs]

This is leverage. http://www.thestreet.com/story/11491540/1/us-airways-labor-pacts-could-hinder-amr-merger-effort.html?puc=yahoo&cm_ven=YAHOO

 

[Beancounter]

This is leverage. http://www.thestreet.com/story/11491540/1/us-airways-labor-pacts-could-hinder-amr-merger-effort.html?puc=yahoo&cm_ven=YAHOO

First off, anything written by Ted Reed concerning US Airways should be taken with 2 spoonfuls of salt.

How will the snap back provision have any effect on this merger? I'm asking seriously, not just sarcasm.

America West acquired US Airways and management was able to structure it so that the snap back didn't come into play. American in bankruptcy definitely won't be the acquiring airline.

I could see it coming into play if Delta was acquiring us, but that's not what we're talking about.

I hope the flight attendants didn't pass on a pay raise thinking they had a secret weapon, because it might not have any ammo in it. From what I've heard though, they probably did the right thing, because it sounds like it was just a cost neutral contract.

Bean