I wouldn’t say that we're "fat" when it comes to EMB CA's. Yes we have 99 CA's and 71 lines in FAT but FAT holds the majority of reserves for the EMB system. I would say that we are now properly staffed when it comes to EMB CA's and understaffed when it comes to EMB FO's.

We had 37 total reserve EMB CA’s system wide for July and 22 of them are in FAT, with only 16 reserve EMB FO’s system wide and 0 of them are in FAT. That’s a reserve %age of 14% for CA’s and 6% for FO’s. On the RJ we have 186 reserve CA’s and 202 reserve FO’s which equates to a reserve %age of 16% for CA’s and 17% for FO’s. SLC, DEN and ORD staff the majority of the RJ reserves. SLC has 19% of their FO’s sitting reserve and 15% of their CA’s. In DEN the FO/CA %ages are 25%/25% and ORD is 29%/24%.

When you look at the number of reserves system wide you'll see that we're just barely overstaffed when it comes to our current RJ FLT load, properly staffed on the EMB for CA's and understaffed when it comes to EMB FO's. Now if we lose flying or decrease anywhere then those %ages will rise. This is why everything has being cancelled (new hires, transitions & upgrades), Mgmnt wants attrition to whittle away at the above numbers and if we do decrease in flying then look for SKW to displace a class or two of RJ FO’s to the EMB.

BTW, the above numbers do take into account suspended (FMLA, MIL, Med, TRN, etc) pilots.