EMB 170/190 Excuse to pay less
 

I have friends working on these airplanes and they are very proud of it but yet they fail to notice that they make the same amount of money that a 50 seat jet pilots do. Since when the 100 seat jet is called a rejonal jet? It occurs to me that 737-300 seats 124 seats and yet their pilots don't get payed $24 per hour. Calling EMB 190 a regional jet is just an excuse to rip us off....

Who's flying a 190 for regional pay? Compass?

Negative. That would be the E-175 @ Compass. Industry standard pay. But daaaaaaamn the standard sure seems low these days! Don't know who's running 190's at a regional. Never heard of that...

First you have to look at how the government defines a regional airline.

A U.S. airline's rank is determined by the amount of revenue it generates.

Large regionals - These are scheduled carriers with $20-million to $100-million in annual revenue. They operate aircraft that can accommodate more than 60 passengers. [NOTE: No upper limit on # of seats. Air Tran, American Eagle, Comair, Mesa, Express Jet, Sky West and others are (by government definition) National Airlines - not Regional.]

Medium regionals - These airlines operate on a smaller scale, with operating revenues of under $20-million, and often use only small aircraft.

Small regionals - These airlines don't have a set revenue definition, but are usually referred to as "commuter airlines." They use small aircraft with less than 61 seats.

Regional aircraft are so defined by the manufacturer. (ERJ, CRJ, etc.)

I understand the sometimes it's inportant to be politically correct. But come on. Everyone on this board understands what is meant when refering to regionals, nationals, and majors. This is regardless of revenues generated.

Having looked at the regional pay scale any which way to make it more palatable. I realize that contract company pay will always be below what should be acceptable. Of course my opionion is that any jet FO should start at the 40K mark.

Not trying to be politically correct; trying to be factually correct. Educate me.

Realizing that different groups have different definitions, what is the "everyone's accepted board definition" of regional, national and major? Might as well throw in legacy while we are at it.

I am under the impression that we are renegotiating that with our new contract.

The government definitions don't take into account whether you sell your own tickets, but that is a key discerning factor for those who work in the industry. According to the Fed, Mesa is a major airline :rolleyes: I think these are more realistic definitions:

Majors: There are several flavors, but they all sell their own tickets (or package service), and mostly fly larger aircraft...
-Legacy: Extensive international service and have been around a while, UAL, AA.
-National/LCC: Domestic only, SWA, JB
-Big cargo: UPS/FDX

Regionals: Contract, don't sell many or any tickets
-Jet Regionals: Fly RJ's (SKW, AWAC)
-Commuters: T-props only (Colgan, Big Sky)


ACMI are kind of their own category. Startups such as VA and Skybus are not worthy of recognition at this point (and hopefully never will be :mad: ).

Well let's see Southwest flies all domestic and has revenue over 1 billion a year and they're a major. We travel to 30 destinations in Mexico, 12 in Canada, 68% of the continental US, seasonally to Flores, Guatemala, we also generate over a billion in revenue annually, and we're a "regional"?...I guess North America is a region....must have something to do with the aircraft! ;)