Not a knock on anyone but if we start taking each airframe and making a placeholder, what precedent does that set at the REGIONAL level. If the -900 is premium, what was the avro? What was the -200 in the early 2000's? The mindset has always been "more pax + more responsibility= more money" but that formula has coefficients of economy of scale, world factors, and managerial success. It all comes together to form Regionals vs. Majors. Those who have seniority to fly the larger aircraft will make more money. Those who get the experience under their belt AND a desire to leave have the ability to move to a major, where you are back to the fundamental formula of a larger aircraft and larger economy of scale results in potentially more earnings. A Saab driver does not necessarily have a better skill set than a -900 driver, but a Saab will make less than a -900 driver. The Q/-200 will be an interesting shakeout in time due to this mindset. If you recall the uproar over the Q rates were not from a Q driver being "better", but holding more responsibility.

Now, to complete this rant- take a look at the dc9-10 rates when the 900's showed up. Should there have been such a difference? NO, but the idea of "economy of scale" at the regional level (as compared to majors) is the only answer pilots can use as justification. We are simply paid an allowance by our parents (mainline). It's like we are helping the family by cutting the grass and doing yard work. Until we show that we are indeed "adults" in the market and are able to make our own profits (at risk flying, cost sharing,etc) while becoming an economy of scale the regional/mainline differential will remain at a farther spread than simply seat count.