The flip side to the coin is that the companies frequently use their regionals to open new routes to test the market. Those routes, if there is sufficient demand, soon become mainline routes. Vice versa, when there is insufficient demand to support a mainline aircraft, they frequently ship the route back to the regional... they will often do this and run the regional at a loss in order to bring in additional feed at mainline, and just as importantly, to deny full market share to the competition.

It's a double edged sword. The mainline companies need to be much more careful when negotiating around scope issues. IF, and I say again "IF" they do decide to give a scope concession (for whatever reason) they should insist upon language that restricts the scope concession to wholly owned regionals.
Likewise, the wholly owned regionals need to include scope clauses preventing them from being used as Republic currently is against Midwest.

The end result would be that places like Republic, Chataqua, Pinnacle would eventually be frozen out of work... since only the owned regionals would be able to get the new equipment.
Then... when mainline contracts come due, there would only be the mainline company, and the wholly owned regional to do battle together against the company.... and since the regional scope would prohibit them from flying the mainline stuff, there would be no whipsawing.

The immediate problem is the companies that stick somebody elses name in big letters on the plane, but are operated by a company that will fly in anybody's colors, for less money then the wholly owned companies. They are dragging everybody down with them.

The secondary problem is getting both mainline and wholly owned regionals to work together more. We don't have to be friends, we don't even have to like eachother.... but there is an old saying. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Our collective enemy, is the parent company, and they are counting on us to NOT work together.

 

I wonder if you guys like it when you get something for less than you paid before. I wonder how many of you still pay $4,000.00 for a laptop or $3000.00 for a desktop computer. It is odd to me how you could be willing to take part in the economy as a consumer and enjoy how technology has lowered the price of goods and services over time. I would think you guys would be standing at best buy screaming at the top of your lungs that you WILL NOT be paying $600 for this laptop. I DEMAND to pay the inflation-corrected price that this laptop would have cost in 1995!

Most of you will not get my point (or pretend not to) and many of you will attack me. The fact is, typewriter repair people got laid off or had to adjust to new lines of work. If you don't like how technology and change have affected your business, artificially trying to adjust the market because you want to get paid more will only work if you somehow convince ALL of the competition to join you. That is actually illegal, but it won't happen anyway because free-market competition has lowered the price of your services.

 

So do you believe that the pervasive use of bankruptcy courts to unilaterally rewrite contracts that had been negotiated under the RLA, with no possibility of recourse for the employee groups affected, really constitutes a "free market" at work?

 

Don't forget other regionals like ASA, Skywest, AW and Expressjet.

Would you think the same way if whatever company you work for is sold? Be careful what you wish for.

 

If any future scope concessions were only granted to wholly owned companies it would not be in the parent companies interest to sell them.
The eventual result sometime in the future would be a consolidation of the mainline and regional part 121 operations into just one airline to streamline operations and reduce costs.

 

Mason,

If AMR had it their way Eagle wouldn't be wholly-owned. Inbluskyz hit the nail on the head with his comment.

I'd like to know, when AMR finally sells Eagle, will you quit and go to work at one of the wholly-owned regionals or will you change your song?

 

Your argument that technology has lowered the price of an airline pilot's services, and your analogy of the computer is fallacious at best. Technology has played no part whatsoever. What has played a part is the fact that there are those who are willing to do the same job for less, and the scourge of the bankruptcy court. Or as Junglebus so aptly put it, "the pervasive use of bankruptcy courts to unilaterally rewrite contracts that had been negotiated under the RLA, with no possibility of recourse for the employee groups affected." Amen, brother.

 

Please, send a memo to mainline management and stop this insanity...

 

But premium pay is $84 Point taken. We're getting there...very slowly

 

Technology has greatly affected this industry. Flying a plane is much easier and navigation is a whole lot easier than it was 20 years ago (unless you fly equipment that has not been upgraded like my 727 bros). I'm sure there are many of you that fly on older equipment, fine. Anyway, dudes with no experience are flooding the market and for the most part not crashing jets daily. You are correct, there are many factors bringing down the wages of pilots.

And to say you have no recourse is an idiotic statement. For now, this country is still free! You can go out and get a job or start a business doing ANYTHING YOU WANT!