Personally, I don't believe the question of experience is a major factor in discussing the Regional-Mainline divide. I think it's inappropriate to say that regional pilots are less experienced and therefore not as safe as their mainline counterparts. If we are going to look at the 121 training standards, regulations, and qualifications directly from a safety standpoint, then the abstract differences between Regional Feeds and Mainline Feeds are irrelevant.

Regional and Mainline Airlines have both had some of the best safety records in relation to the size and operation of the airline industry, and we have also seen tragedy as the direct result flight crew error on both sides of the industry. Relating the last 6 accidents to regional airlines as a direct result to inexperience on the flight deck is irrelevant when you take into account the massively, huge increase of regional capacity over the last 10 years. I'm not saying that inexperience wasn't a FACTOR, but I don't think it was merely the reason.

The problem with scope is a double-edged sword of responsibility; the regional pilots flying mainline routes under lesser contractual terms than mainline pilots, and the mainline pilots who thought relaxing scope clause was going to be a good thing in the long run. Personally I could care less if the chicken or the egg came first, in the end the majority of us are all career aviators trying to make a living.

That being said, I think their needs to be a firm definitive, division between what constitutes a "Mainline" company versus what constitutes a "Regional" company. I think that ALPA National has dropped the ball to some extent by allowing the individual pilot group decide for themselves where a scope line is drawn. Furthermore, I don't feel ALPA can represent Regional Airlines and Mainline Airlines without a very distinct, in my eyes, conflict of interest. One group grows at the demise of another with management deciding on the cheapest death.

This letter does nothing more than overstep a pilot groups' contractual issues onto the sentiment of many concerned Americans who look to travel by air safely. ALPA needs to stop looking to Washington and Airline Management to fix its' issues.

How can ALPA represent both the RJ guys and the Mainline guys at the same time? They are in direct competition with eachother, are they not? It would be like using a realator that is representing the buyer and the seller. Your thoughts?

and people do that sometimes when they buy a house....not unusual.

What day did Wendy's letter appear in the 'Trib? I haven't been able to find it online. I'm kinda curious about the public's commentary on the matter.

It may happen all the time, but that doesn't make it an ideal situation if you are the buyer. I wan't a realator / or union to represent me and my pilot group solely. I wouldn't want my realtor or my union pitting two people house buyer and seller or RJ or mainline pilot against eachother. Is the conflict of interest only appearant to me?
-Aloha

I agree !

You are joking, right? You are going to argue that experience is not a big difference between the regional and mainline? I am not slamming either side, or trying to start a fight, but experience is a major difference, IMO....

Did I read that wrong? Stated that the 1500 laid off pilots would be domestic captains mentoring young co-pilots? Seems to me that the 737 captains are now flying right seat on the 757 or 777 unless they are laying off from the top down. I wish none were laid off but that comment seemed odd to me.

Couldn't agree more. ALPA wants all of the money/dues but then puts itself into a conflict of interest situation when it comes to representing us during contract negotiations.

She failed to mention that the experience and training levels could be equalized by the FAA by requiring an ATP as part 121 minimum hiring standard. That is something that the public could demand today and fix it prior to the next hiring wave.