I agree regional pilots need to stand up for ourselves. But that doesn't mean that mainline pilots don't have a stake in what regional pilots get. Scope clauses help mainline pilots by adding pilots on the bottom of the mainline seniority list. Pilots should stand up for pilots. Get over this whole me versus the other pilot group bull that's been in this industry for way too long.

Agreed, from a regional gear thrower. The only thing the creation of regionals have succeeded in doing is pitting pilot groups against one another. Dividing everyone as much as possible has always been management's goal, and the pilots have bitten it. Now is the time to spit it back out in their face.

Agreed, and well said. I liked the bumper sticker comment someone made too.

You are once again looking from a pilot perspective. You need to look at this from a company perspective. Look at the profits from the regionals. Where did that come from? It is not from operating efficiently. It is from a guaranteed profit called a margin. Some get 7%, some get 12%. Fact is that these 100's of millions of dollars a year that DAL gives these regionals, added to the whole cost of the DCI arm of DAL, could be in sourced and more than make up the increased costs from a better contract. In fact is they would save a ton of money!

If you dropped or flunked out of night school and became an entry level bean counter at any airline, wouldn't you try to level pay with some sort of pilot cost per seat mile formula? I see that as the cap for small capacity RJ wages.

Someone somewhere has to be taking a look at the cost of running 3 full RJ's vs. one 737NG. Want to really make it hard? Compare the pilot costs of a full 757-300 to a 50 seat RJ. That is the death knell for RJ wages.

Are you sure DCI operates in that profit margin? Especially after the BK?

If I remember correctly, XJT had one of the highest operating margins when the previous CPA was at cost plus 10%, later lowered to around 7. Most regionals are in the sub 5% range.

I seriously doubt the MESA operates in 7-12%. I don't see SkyWest in that range either.

Yep, most regionals have a 401K match. Some are so so, some flat out suck. But how can you say that there isn't much difference between the regional employer's match on the LOWER regional pay scale/income vs. a B fund of a pilot on 1) A higher pay scale and 2) A mainline contract?

Maybe I was being a little too forward with my pound sand comment. I'm a gambling type of guy, what the heck. Bring the 170/175s online at Delta and lets negotiate something and we will see what happens. I dont know how to solve this. However, I do have a family to feed so if the planes and pilots come onboard, I dont want to happen to me what AA did to TWA. Just my opinion

I blame the guy in your avatar for the current state of the airline industry. You know, your generation,

Thank you for releasing scope

Having a "stake" is not the same as the right to determine anothers pay. Just because scope clauses are good for mainline pilots doesn't mean they're good for all regional pilots.

You're right though, if only ALPA hadn't promoted the the two segments of pilots against each other and a lot of mainline pilots hadn't run with that ball, the industry would likley be very different.

Nope pay should be commensurate with experience. I'd fly a motor glider if the pay was liveable.

Yes, I am. All of these contracts have performance criteria. Mesa is where it is due to the litigation.
Look at the regionals 8K and 10K filings and see for yourself

Well, OK. You want to know how the legacy can save money on their regional feeders? Easy, muscle/squeeze them into a lower profit margin. Worked in BK's, ALSO worked for CAL recently.

Maybe you are too busy, but you are dismissing some discussion points here.

As a pilot cost, I don't see how it's cheaper to have a pilot on the mainline pay scale/contract, paying for his B fund. The pilot at the regional level is MUCH cheaper in this regard.

When the flown down starts, the stapled low seniority (cheaper) "small jet" pilots hit the street. The more senior (read, expensive) pilots flow into the small jets. The pilots flying the small jets are now costing more money, they are on higher longevity rates, more vacation time, more sick time. How is this cheaper than the current system where the pilot is simply furloughed? The labor cost economics of the small jet were simply not figured into how expensive those planes would be to operate at mainline rates and workrules. Also, what happens when fuel goes up again? Sure the 190/195 is efficient, the 170 not nearly as much when fuel is expensive.

You said that the DAL 195 rates let alone the 190/900 are higher than JB's 190 , wrong. It's not till 2012 that the DAL rates come close to matching. Like I said, thats the current JB rate, NOT what the 2012 JB rate will be.

What happens when the "narrow body" pilots flow down into "small jets" and realize they are flying it for LESS the LCC operator with the SAME equipment? Sure, they could negotiate a higher rate, but the scenario is furloughs and displacements, usually that doesn't go hand in hand with pay raises. Especially for the pilots that are "junior" on the list. But assuming they DID, what just happened to the cost of operating those "small jets" at the mainline level? Are you sure it was cheaper to have that equipment at mainline as opposed to contract it out where it's easier to leverage?

You keep telling me I'm looking at this from a "pilots point of view", wrong. I'm looking at it from a cost view.