I NEVER said you said swa pilots were not in our peer group. I very clearly stated that was a dalpa meme. Your statement of them not being comparable to us is, however, very much alike to what they have been saying during these negotiations.

And what does multiple fleet type have to do with giving away rj's or not giving away rj's and being profitable (and furloughing, as in slowplays post)? Are you saying that having multiple fleet types somehow makes rj's profitable or a good idea? Seems to me that is a reason to NOT have rj's as we have different types to "fit the bill" ourselves.

And flying around the world imho is irrelevant. The rj's we have basically fly domestically. Just like sw does. We could be using a 737 (or smaller mainline) to bring people to those int'l flights, just like swa uses a 737 to bring in people to connect to their other domestic flights. They have been doing it with a profit. And our rj's DO NOT just feed mainline....

Paying for their type ratings??? Now that is reeeaaalllyy a stretch. What on earth does that have to do with the fact that they are the most profitable airline for quite some time and they have no rj's??? That is an irrelevant "comparable" in realtion to a rj vs non rj profitablity discussion.

The question I originally posed has to do with "comparable" in regards to rj's and profitablity. Not some red-herring comparable of training. Their pilots still go through the same company required training as ours.

Also remember: my original post had to do with slowplays assertion that tighter scope somehow equated into furloughs.