Originally Posted by
forgot to bid
Alright here is an idea and I have no idea how it'll turn out beforehand, but do any of the CPZ, EV, 9E, RAH or OO guys flying 76-seaters care to share their trips? Pick your favorites.
On reserve at ASA, I see the gamut of trips that come up for the larger RJs. There are some 8 or 10 leg 4 days worth 24+, but more common are 12-14 leg 4 days worth 20ish. And of course there is some 5 leg day, low credit junk to go around too. That is all way better then the 50 seat scheds, there I saw 24 and 26 leg 4 days - 7/6/6/5!! Those were rough trips- generally less than 1hr of credit per leg, plenty of airport appreciation and lots of <10hr overnights. Its been a little while since I flew that plane and I think 117 and mainline doing some of the CHA/AGS/BHM etc turns cut down some of the ugliness. Longest leg is about 1400nm, but over 1000 is not that common. Stage length seems to make a huge difference on QOL.....
Originally Posted by
LeineLodge
70?
What I'm concerned about, is that the 9E-type agreements become the favored solution. Clearly mgmt teams are attempting to use this carrot as a means to keep pilots off the mainline longevity scale at significantly depressed rates.
I believe that the coming decade will provide the opportunity to turn this career around. We, collectively as a profession, need to ensure that we make the most of these opportunities. I'm not sure exactly how to go about it, but allowing an off-list C scale (9E et al) is not an acceptable solution. I'm heartened by the EGL and XJT groups rejection of their BS contracts. The more regional pilots refuse to accept substandard living conditions, the better our collective leverage becomes for recovering the flying - to everyone's benefit.
Given the 9E precedent though, it seems like the only way to bring it all back home is if they feel some crushing pain staffing-wise. We need to have our strategy in place when the company comes asking for help with a solution. The only answer IMO is "bring all that flying to mainline and offer those pilots jobs at the bottom of the Delta seniority list."
Sooner or later the various regionals are going to begin defaulting on their performance obligations because they can't staff the airplanes. That will provide Delta the leverage necessary to reclaim the airframes (ie get out of the contracts Freedom style.) Once Delta, the corporation, decides that they are taking over the flying, there is no DFR conversation or Comair power-play shenanigans. If Delta wants/needs to get this done, it will be done. We MUST have our solution/suggestion ready when they come to us.
Unfortunately, the 9E capitulation was facilitated by DL and DALPA, by way of the preferential interview. The "C-scale" was sold to great effect by the carrot of a short-cut to a DL seniority # (And the play was repeated even more effectively over at PSA). It would be helpful if the carrots could be offered to those who do the right thing (ie, refusing to accept substandard living conditions), instead of those who are undermining your long term objectives. While there is a percentage at the top of our list who are content where they are with decent pay and QOL; most of us are grinding it out weekly and keeping our noses clean in hopes of getting the chance to be junior on the 88 or 717 someday.
Originally Posted by
CGfalconHerc
It frustrates me, and 1310 other DL furloughees, when you continue to blame us and ALPA for our own furlough, and yet refuse to admit that RJ captains benefitted greatly when we were replaced. I'm usually a pretty low key guy, but that loss of situational awareness requires a response.
I understand your bitterness, and I do not discount the hardship it caused, but I think your perspective is colored by your own experience. You have said that the RJ pilots received a "windfall". A few benefited, a little. Most got a meh job for crap pay with a crap schedule at a crappy company. Quite a few ended up getting furloughed from or losing their bottom feeding jobs. Most of us had few, if any other options at the time. I had a couple thousand hrs and an ATP when I got hired into the RJ (around the time DL sold us off), and to get to DL/NW/CAL/UAL/AMR/LLC/AT/SW, one needed 121 PIC time on his/her resume. Should I have gone to Great Lakes or CommutAir instead of ASA? Should I have chosen even poorer pay and QOL on my journey to a mainline seniority #? Perhaps, the conventional wisdom now seems to be that new pilots should go to the outfit with the worst pay and work rules because turnover is high and a quick upgrade will get you to mainline fastest. Right now, some of the worst companies to work for are the ones filling classes. That is the dynamic in place, because there is a rising level of desperation among regional pilots. The DL furloughs sucked, one of my commuting buddies was in that group. The givebacks and the pension losses sucked. And yes, there may have been some short term turnabout with RJ pilots benefiting at your loss. But in the long-term, anyone with a DL # is still doing better than any RJ pilot out there. And RJ pilots cannot do much beyond what they are now, voting down concessionary TA's, applying for better jobs and, sometimes voting with their feet and just leaving the industry. You as a Delta Airlines Pilot have the say on what your scope is in the next contract. And yes, "a few (seriously misguided) disgruntled pilots with lawyers" can make problems, but don't let a few arshlochs being arshlochs keep you from doing the right thing. And when you (DL pilots) decide on how to deal with this thing, let us know. Plenty of us playing the long game who would like to help, through official channels or otherwise.
Bucking Bar: I am continually impressed by your insight and profoundly ethical sense of decency in most everything you post about. You might just be the smartest guy in the room.