Search
Notices

E175 sfo

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 02-05-2021, 10:05 PM
  #31  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: May 2018
Posts: 1,174
Default

Originally Posted by NewGuy01 View Post
I struggle with numbers? That’s rich coming from the guy who predicted our furlough to a tenth of a percent.

You must be bummed. You were looking forward to seeing your crying FO “friends” at the Wally Mart in Gig Harbor.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Am I missing something, does this dude make any sense to any one else on here, anyone?
OTZeagle1 is offline  
Old 02-06-2021, 01:21 AM
  #32  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2019
Posts: 791
Default

Originally Posted by ExperimentalAB View Post
700MAX all the way at one rate, absolutely. But that still doesn’t fix the outsourcing.
True, but E175’s are never going to be flown by Alaska Airlines or the pilots on the Alaska Airlines seniority list. The last chance we had to fix it was “Contract 200”. We have not negotiated anything in the ensuing 8 years. Hoping for something in the form of scope and protective provisions by 2024. The next two years are toast as we torch the cash supply flying empty jets
9mikemike is offline  
Old 02-06-2021, 07:08 AM
  #33  
It's 5 o'clock somewhere
 
Margaritaville's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2020
Posts: 1,853
Default

Yawn. The concept of integrating a mainline list with a wholly owned regional has been kicked around since Delta bought Comair in 1999. It will never happen for 1000 different reasons. Talking about it is just mental masturbation. Arguing about is is foolish.
Margaritaville is offline  
Old 02-06-2021, 11:04 AM
  #34  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: C172 FO
Posts: 33
Default

Originally Posted by Margaritaville View Post
Yawn. The concept of integrating a mainline list with a wholly owned regional has been kicked around since Delta bought Comair in 1999. It will never happen for 1000 different reasons. Talking about it is just mental masturbation. Arguing about is is foolish.
Notice that people like this never give specific reasons why. "1000 different reasons" is not an argument BTW
mart83648 is offline  
Old 02-06-2021, 06:40 PM
  #35  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2019
Posts: 144
Default

Originally Posted by 9mikemike View Post
We had 100 seat 737-200’s, 124 seat 737-700’s, 140 seat MD 80’s, 144 seat 737-400’s, 156 seat 737-800’s and 172 seat 737-900’s (w/ mid-cabin lavs) all for the same hourly rate....Where does a plan to bring in an A220-300 that flys trans con, can do etops and seats 115 -145 pax fit into that. Even a 195-E2 can fly 110 -140 depending on config...Why should we accept less money to fly a significantly more capable airframe then we have already had. Pre chinaflue Alaska had an RFQ out to Boeing for 700MAX, Airbus for 220-300 and Embraer for E195-E2. In Alaska managements mind those 3 airframes are equal period. So they pay equal....Jetblue just created a permanent B scale by allowing the A220-300, an airframe that hauls just as many pax as a 319, flies further and costs less to operate , to be flown for less....
This is the typical "we're special at Alaska" mentality that got us in this position. Without scope all the bluster in the world won't stop management from having qx fly 190s or Cseries while you guys remenice about your special relationship with management that dulled your senses to the expansion of regionals over the last 20 years.

You keep believing your special and see how far that gets everyone. I can't wait to spend my commute explaining how we're the only airlines with regions flying 100+ planes for half what we could have done it for.
Back2future is offline  
Old 02-06-2021, 07:19 PM
  #36  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2019
Posts: 791
Default

Originally Posted by Back2future View Post
This is the typical "we're special at Alaska" mentality that got us in this position. Without scope all the bluster in the world won't stop management from having qx fly 190s or Cseries while you guys remenice about your special relationship with management that dulled your senses to the expansion of regionals over the last 20 years.

You keep believing your special and see how far that gets everyone. I can't wait to spend my commute explaining how we're the only airlines with regions flying 100+ planes for half what we could have done it for.
So your answer is to fly 100 to 145 seats at a 25% discount so that we can pretend like we have scope. Still waiting on the 50 to 100 seat plan...Lets do a 50% discount...Then we will have A scale, B scale and C scale...Sounds good to me. Lets propose it. We will use Skywest/Horizon rates for our C scale, Sun Country’s rates for our B scale and our rates for A scale. If you are a C scale crew you get C scale work rules and such......Get er done Mr Delorean
9mikemike is offline  
Old 02-06-2021, 07:42 PM
  #37  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2020
Posts: 537
Default

Originally Posted by 9mikemike View Post
We had 100 seat 737-200’s, 124 seat 737-700’s, 140 seat MD 80’s, 144 seat 737-400’s, 156 seat 737-800’s and 172 seat 737-900’s (w/ mid-cabin lavs) all for the same hourly rate....Where does a plan to bring in an A220-300 that flys trans con, can do etops and seats 115 -145 pax fit into that. Even a 195-E2 can fly 110 -140 depending on config...Why should we accept less money to fly a significantly more capable airframe then we have already had. Pre chinaflue Alaska had an RFQ out to Boeing for 700MAX, Airbus for 220-300 and Embraer for E195-E2. In Alaska managements mind those 3 airframes are equal period. So they pay equal....Jetblue just created a permanent B scale by allowing the A220-300, an airframe that hauls just as many pax as a 319, flies further and costs less to operate , to be flown for less....
Wait...jetblue has a permanent B scale on the 220? And it is a B scale that pays 96% of their A scale? And by that logic, does delta have an A/B/C/D/E/F/G/H/I scale? Are you even familiar with the history of the B scale in this industry? Separate pay scales for different sized planes is not a B scale. What those rates are is up to the pilot group to negotiate. I’ll take JB’s scope and $220/hr E190 rates + $264/hr A220 rates ($224 and $269 next year if this LOA passes) over AS’s outsourced RJs and no scope any day. Also, just to be pedantic since it seems fitting for a response to your post, there’s no such thing as a 700MAX.
copy is offline  
Old 02-06-2021, 09:30 PM
  #38  
Respek
 
Cruz5350's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,603
Default

We’re sitting here arguing about whose contract is better when all 3 of our pilot groups will see losses due to the new 3 way between AA/AS/JB when the real winners will be management and the share holders.
Cruz5350 is offline  
Old 02-06-2021, 10:19 PM
  #39  
Prime Minister/Moderator
 
rickair7777's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,293
Default

Originally Posted by Cruz5350 View Post
We’re sitting here arguing about whose contract is better when all 3 of our pilot groups will see losses due to the new 3 way between AA/AS/JB when the real winners will be management and the share holders.
In times like these the objective is not to be better, it's to suck less than the other guys
rickair7777 is offline  
Old 02-06-2021, 10:49 PM
  #40  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Aug 2008
Posts: 180
Default

All you guys are on the board of directors? And here I thought this was a pilot’s message board.

Pilots don’t decide who merges with who. What you all think “should” happen is completely irrelevant.
jayme is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
shizzle
Delta
79
07-08-2015 05:22 PM
BHopper88
Regional
18
08-06-2008 07:22 PM
ryane946
Major
2
01-10-2007 08:42 AM
ryane946
JetBlue
1
01-10-2007 06:27 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices