To be fair, I don't see any chance of UAL/DAL/AA going bankrupt anytime soon, nor do I see any labor disputes on the horizon like EAL had (ironically WE are the ones headed for a labor dispute). Their management seems to be trying to reach across the proverbial aisle and show their gratitude for the pilots' share of making record profits and doling out big raises unlike Lorenzo did back in the days you speak of. Eastern had a lot of debt, poor labor relations, and of course they had Lorenzo. Anything could happen in the next 20-30 years, but I think any pilot entering the 121 world is a whole lot better off at the big 3 than here. Comparing coming to JetBlue instead of a legacy today to going to SWA instead of EAL in 1982 is not a comparison worth mentioning since times and situations are so different.

Percentage movement on the seniority list at those 3 is, without argument from anyone, way better than here due to retirements and so many different fleets/bases. Those 3 airlines are making more money than we are. Those 3 airlines have way better networks than we have. Those 3 airlines have way better on time performance than we have. Those 3 airlines have better culture than we have at this point with management leading us to a labor dispute. Oh and those 3 airlines have way better bases than we have. Oh and I can't forget the most important thing to us pilots...they all have better contracts/pay/time off than we have.

Maybe when hybrid electric planes, potato farms, and customer service apps are more important than all those things listed above, I'll agree with your statement and comparison to EAL/SWA.

 

If you consider LGB/LAX & FLL/MIA to be colocated, our only base not covered by AA/UA/DL is MCO which seems to be fairly desirable on a relative base. Unless of course your idea of way better is anything in the middle of the country or Guam.

 

Yes middle of the country would suit me way better. I would love a non coast base.

 

Fair enough, I would imagine contract comparisons are a little less subjective than base options.

 

We are the lowest paid airline amongst our peers in the highest cost of living bases with probably the highest percentage of commuters (we get to work more and commute more) because most of us don't want to (read can't afford to) live in our bases. My idea of "better" is a base in which I can afford to live comfortably on JetBlue FO pay with my family. IAH/DFW/ATL/DEN/ORD/SLC/PHX/CLT/DCA/IAD come to mind, which is where a lot of guys I've flown with commute from. BOS is fine. MCO would be fine if it wasn't so senior. LA, NY, south Florida? meh. So yeah, I'll stick to my argument that the other 3/4 airlines have better base options unless you live near BOS.

 

Wait dca and Iad?

Ha ha ha

Yeah real cheap around these parts

But I am all for that DCA base

 

Yea so when a nor easter goes through, we now shut down 3 bases instead of 2.

 

Odd but it works.

Since the wx moves up the cost most of the time. You are not trying to DH crews down from a now closed BOS to a now open DCA.

With 30 flights and access to BOS MCO and FLL it can make it easy to move pilots around if need be.

 

What is the total number of departures for a combined IAD/DCA/BWI? Triple co-base once we have a CBA?

 

Problem is the mixed fleet.
But I would say around 45 ish
Yeah I agree it's not "JetBlue" enough but it sure would cut down on hotel costs and every time we have an IROP I wouldn't have CS calling to see if I would help out(note I do not the only way we get a base is if things keep Cx because of crew)

Not to mention all of the guys that live in the area(most with out a base)But none of this happens (if ever) without a CBA with displacement language.