History has shown otherwise...

- Seasonal furloughs for junior pilots (or any pilots selected by management regardless of longevity).

- Schedules assigned per management favoritism.

- Permanent layoffs of older, more expensive pilots. To be replaced by young, cheap pilots when things turn around.

- Long layovers = "days off".

- Termination for pilots with low productivity (low productivity = sick calls, fatigue calls, mx writeups, delays, refusal to fly in wx, diversions, etc).

etc, etc, etc

I think you have a stark misunderstanding of how unions work.

Not to mention that without strong Unions, The Majors would scope out all but the wide body flying to the regional system. That would mean all but a select few pilots would get B-scale wages.

You may be right to some extent, I have only worked under a union controlled shop the last 4 years of my career as a pilot. As of today I have made less in pay and benefits under union representation than I did when negotiating my own terms with my previous employer's of the last 24 years as a pilot. So, if I wait my turn as dues paying pilot, I should eventually make what I was before just 5 years shy of retirement.
I thought the idea of a union was to increase pay and benefits for the employee. That appears to be in stark contrast to the meager gains the unions have made for the regional industry of the past decade. Under union control the regional's have been able to flourish and expand low paying jobs. As one poster has stated we now have 76 pax jets flying overlapping routes of mainline carriers, and turboprop routes are almost all but gone.

I believe union memership represents 10 -12% of the labor force in the US. I wonder why the other 88 % doesn't get in line. Please clear up my misunderstanding.

What are you looking for, a guarantee, mediocrity over performance? No guarantees in life, even under union control. Still gonna have furloughs. Long layovers and inefficient schedule's are the norm at my airline, as well as 11 days off on reserve, and yep... we have a union.

Like I said in response to another post, why have the unions allowed the expansion of the low paying regional model over the past 15 plus years? I think regionals make up half the domestic schedules. I thought the unions charter was to promote good payin jobs and benefits?

I definitely have an issue with unions at the regional level, really alpa.

In general regional unions are a net positive. At some regionals, lack of a union would be a catastrophe.

In the case of alpa, they have a conflict of interest... mainline pilots are their real constituency, and rocking the gravy train is not really in their best interest. So no one (National, or the various MEC leaders) is going to get behind an association-wide movement to either pay regional pilots more, or bring them in house. Reality... I get paid more because regional pilots work for less. The regional system (whipsaw) ensures that. I don't want to change that at this point (already paid my dues, need to see the payoff now).

For alpa at a regional assume you will get some protection from the company, and assume your dues will contribute to the general benefit of the profession as a whole. Do not assume that there will be any wholesale organized attempt to save you from your circumstances, you have to do that for yourself, here's a link to get started: www.airlineapps.com

So you're correct on that point. I just don't think throwing out the baby with the bath water is a good idea. Although Skywest didn't need a union when I started there.

There are a few things contributing. Maybe you've heard of them. 9/11, recession of 2008, major bankruptcies/consolidation. What would you have the unions do to stop these?

You speak like ALPA was a proponent of scope-give and the regional model as a whole. It was the members who voted for their own wallets at the detriment of the next generation. ALPA is only as good as it's voting members. The conflict of interest argument is silly. ALPA gives it's regionals the same resources as it's majors. They can't help if the MECs aren't capable of leading/managements are adversarial. If you have a good company with solid management, a union can only help. It can't work magic.

I used to agree with you until the UAX/UA jumpseat disagreement. I find it incredibly coincidental that the only two carriers who went to bat against UA unilaterally changing the jumpseat agreement were Republic and SkyWest, both non-ALPA, while every single ALPA UAX carrier said nothing.

That issue was resolved before it was even an issue. Hard to say what ALPA did or didn't do.