View Single Post
Old 06-26-2012 | 10:43 AM
  #104092  
Mesabah
:-)
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,339
Likes: 1
Default

Originally Posted by APCLurker
I've asked before and never got a response: to any body that voted yes to outsourcing 50 seat rj's back in the day, did you also look at DC-9-10 flying as somehow "beneath" you? They only had 80-some seats. What was the "excuse" for allowing it to happen?
It's absolutely essential that pilots see the flying they're giving away as beneath them for scope relief to work. If fact many mainline pilots see regional pilots as beneath them when such is not the case. This leads to a vicious cycle in which the union is forced to give up further aircraft rather than fight a battle that only benefits pilots that its core constituency views as not worthy.

Management over the years has subscribed to the cut costs vs raising prices philosophy in trying to become or remain profitable. The problem with this model is it assumes every employee is required to work as productively and efficiently as possible to make the operation viable with such cost cutting. Pilots thus have bent over backwards to ensure the operation is running smoothly and on time. Which as a result, management, over the years, has been able to cut the rank and file employees down to the minimum that that extra pilot productivity level supports. If pilots were to suddenly pull that support or any group for that matter, the operation would likely grind to a halt. This is the only leverage pilots have left as the years of lobbying the government, gaming the court system, corruption, and a whole other list of factors has pretty much muted the effect of unions.