E175 sfo
#31
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2018
Posts: 1,174
Am I missing something, does this dude make any sense to any one else on here, anyone?
#32
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2019
Posts: 791
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
#33
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.
#34
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: C172 FO
Posts: 33
Notice that people like this never give specific reasons why. "1000 different reasons" is not an argument BTW
#35
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2019
Posts: 144
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....
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.
#36
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2019
Posts: 791
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.
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.
#37
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2020
Posts: 537
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....
#39
In times like these the objective is not to be better, it's to suck less than the other guys
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post