I was told that it says "new" airplanes. that means a dc-9 replacement would allow for more 76 seaters. just what I was told, haven't read it yet.

 

Well put!!!!!

 

The CR9's are going to fly old Avro routes to begin with. The CR9 is not replacing the 9. If anything will be used in it's place it will be the E170 Compass will be flying. Also, NWA will be the launch customer for the Bombardier C-series. That was the deal made three years ago as a possible replacement for MAINLINE flying of the DC9.

 

Thanks, XJ.

 

Eric,
I think my point to you and 1900 is that you are preaching to the choir.

If you think you can tell us about flying for the commuters and pathetic pay, you are preachng to the choir.

If you think you can tell us about the effect of giving up scope, you are preaching to the choir.

And, if you think you can inform us about how many RJ's are out there, you are preaching to the choir.

The point I made, that you seemed to miss, is that we know what's up.

Don't come yapping in our face about what happened in the past. Some, even most of us, are willing to do what it takes to get back what we lost.

But for you, or anyone else, to approach us with, "Hey, NWA guy's, why did you do that?" (like the little guy that was bugging Maverick in Top Gun because he wouldn't fire), is disrespectful.

For you to try to tell someone about the pathetic pay at the commuters when they were flying for the commuters when you were in grade school, is disrespectful.

In essence, I am saying that to point out the obvious to someone in a way that is not constructive, is disrespectful.

If you can't see that then, dude, you have no clothes.

 

With the upgrade times and the seniority lists at the commuters rolling upward so fast, many people are not having to wait to become captain very long. You can survive at most commuters as a captain. It's not the best but you can manage.

However, when the next downturn hits, and these new entries into the commuters, which is the largest commuter base in history start staying at F/O pay for 5-10 years, I think the reality of this industry will set in a little deeper.

 

If 1900 and I are preaching to the choir then way does it still happen. why do the majors continue to give up scope. they obviously haven't learned that lesson yet. even after 9-11 when guys were getting furloughed they gave up more airplanes. I'm not just talking about just NWA either.

You say that I am preaching to the choir but it doesn't seem like it. when you don't think that giving up scope affects regional pilots and future pilots it seems like i'm not preaching to the choir. whether that's the the case or not that's what it seems like.

in regards to the maveric comment he knew he didn't fire and screwed up but didn't want to here it, right. now think to the last dog fight in the movie when tim robbins is his RIO. maveric screws up again and this time Tim is yelling at him to get back in the fight or ice isn't going to survive. maveric and tim would have been fine if he left the fight but iceman and his RIO wouldn't be. sometimes you need someone yelling, questioning, or telling you that you screwed up so that it doesn't continue to happen over and over. right now it is happening over and over with larger airplanes. 1900 was just asking why. he doesn't work for NWA and just wanted to know why because he doesn't understand it either.

when you say that you are willing to fight to get it back does that mean getting those airplanes back because I just don't see it. I believe that the pay and work rules will go up again but I don't see any major EVER getting the planes back.

It is very frustrating to hear people know how bad it is at the regionals and yet they still give more and more airplanes to them. this is not directed at you but to every major and to alpa who is suppose to be looking out for all pilots. just curious how big were the regionals when you were their?

 

American, United, USAirways, Delta, America West, and Alaska all "gave up" their 76 seat flying long before NWA pilots did. Do you really think it was going to stay on the NWA property? Remember, the original threat at NWA was all flying 100 seats and below was going to NEWCO. I don't want to get into wether that threat was real or perceived, but there were enough of pilots who believed it was real.This made holding on to the 100 seat flying a major focus of the negotiating commitee.
Right or wrong, this is an industry that plays follow the leader in many ways, and scope is one of them. I personally hate RJ's and would prefer to see 76 seaters on the NWA property. With the "shortage" of qualified pilots(300 hours and a multi-engine rating doesn't count), I would love to see NWA take some or all of the 76 seat flying and put it back on the property. It would be a great way to maybe attract some of the more qualified pilots, and not lose them to ASA, Comair, Express Jet etc. I'm not holding my breath on this one though.

 

They could have and I still remember the day when mesaba avro pilots were getting an earfull asking for the jumpseat and even denied because they flew the avro.

I never thought that I would see the day that Continental pilots were the only pilots to hold their ground in not giving up the 70 seaters. remember the old saying that if your friends jump off a bridge doesn't mean you have to also.

airlines trying to get rid of or loosening scope is nothing new. think back to the lorenzo days. what is new is that the majors are actually doing it now. like a friend of mine says once the toothpaste is out of the tube there is no putting it back.

I would love to see the 70+ seaters back to the majors.

 

Eric,

If you don't see EVER getting the airplanes back at the majors, then why even bring it up?

I mean what's the point of complaining if you can't conceive of any solutions? That's my point. You are just yapping.

The difference in our examples is key.

In Top Gun when the little guy was yapping at Maverick ("We could have had 'em man!") they were off the airplane oand on the ground. Maverick could not have done anything at that point.

Your Tim Robbins example is great, because he, on the other hand was yelling at him while they were in the air. Maverick was able to take his advice and do something with it.

If you can see my point, it is that you are not being constructive yapping at us while offering no suggestions. This is what I'm saying is disrespectful.

If you say that all you wanted to do is know what we gave up scope in our last K, I answered it in my first post. A bunch of senior guys convinced too many junior guys that it was the best K we could get. It actually saved their pensions and did little else for the rest of us.

Now those senior guys are retiring at a pretty good clip. This airline will be full of junior guys very soon because of it. We have huge numbers of retirements coming up and even if "Age 65" did pass, there would be less effect than there would be at other airlines because of the "saved" pensions I mentioned above. In fact, those pilots who were furloughed towards the tail end of the furloughs are a just few numbers from the left seat of the DC-9. Anyone who has been furloughed knows how to risk things and survive if things don't work out. So, when our K is up in 2011, our pilot group will be full of "junior" people. Scope, retirement, and pay will be at the top of our list.

Personally, I think ALL aircraft with a NWA logo on it should be under one K. If our number one -400 pilot wanted to bid to fly right seat of the SAAB-340, I think he should be able to do it. No whipsawing that way. I also, think there should be longevity pay that is not seat specific (like what UPS has). No whipsawing that way.

Who know's who will be in charge of our union at the time our new K comes up, but hopefully we have a chance to change things for the better. That will if we can remain focused and find people that don't complain just to hear their voices.

New K Now