I am considering flying for the airlines and am trying to understand the extremely negative posts regarding the recent arbitration announcement. I am not in the 121 world, so I mean it sincerely when I say I am trying to understand it.

From what I see, the pay scales are a vast improvement especially considering how terrible they were at Alaska. They don't quite match up with the big three, but seem to be very good for a narrowbody-only fleet and on par with SWA. I get that Alaska is a legacy carrier, but it is a MUCH smaller airline than the AAL, UAL, and DAL.

From what I've read on these forums, the schedules are a source of frustration. It is difficult/impossible to drop or trade trips, but that's the way it is at Alaska and any future improvements will require reasonable industry-standard demands and a strong stance from the pilot group.

Scope. This seems to be the most contentious aspect and where I need the most help. Is the concern that all of the flying will/could be taken by the regional carriers? If so, what about the fact that the regionals are struggling so much to recruit and retain pilots? They are struggling to grow (even meet demand) due to the "pilot shortage" right? The frustration seems to be focused on management at Alaska. But I can't imagine management "winning" if they aren't keeping their growing 737 fleet flying.

[bracing for responses, but really want to have a better understanding of all of this stuff]