I HOPE that was not a stab at SKW...If it was, it's sad to see such an ignorant statement come from a fellow pilot. If it was not, I apologize.

Far as your other three points? Dead on...

Just give me a minute son:D I ain't got but two hands!

Benefits I was referring to were pay, non-rev priority (I'm sick of being treated like a lepper and my girl friend getting hassled when I try to get on a CAL flight but then those CAL pilots and FAs just waltz onto an XJT flight without saying a word to the crew). Depending on where you're at and where you came from the work rules, health/dental benefits and retirement can be better or worse. But the main thing that I was getting at was that I would rather spend 30 years on ONE seniority list rather than spend 5-10 years on a regional seniority list and then go back to year one pay at a major. THAT is where the true benefit lies for us regional pilots and where the cost lies for the airline.

And NO, I do NOT think of it as a stigma to be a "regional" pilot. But I do think WE as pilots let that label "regional" hold us back.

Too bad at RAH as an FO there is no pay raise from 145 to 170:D

Show where ANYONE EVER on this forum has said CAL should give up scope. Just one place EVER out of ALL the members. I have no idea who you'd be directing your statements at. They seem very obvious and random. I love it when you guys say things like "you're ok with getting paid 50 seater rates for it". Who would that be exactly? Then I'd like to see your proof of where the pay is out of line and why. Don't simply cry and shout "There should be more". Hell we'd all like 6 figures. Show me where something is slumped then show me where it should be. I've already made a comparison of several aircraft for several airlines at 10yr CA pay. Even graphed it and showed how things were right where they should be. Showed that for the pay to be increased per seat/hr the mainlines would have to start raising their pay first. Your blind rant is noted.

Too bad XJT doesn't pay any different from the 135 to the 145 for FO pay. You'd think for 13 more seats you'd earn more. I guess it's only if you have 20 more seats. :D Too bad it's COMMON PRACTICE IN THE INDUSTRY.

PS. Don't look at UPS, Soutwest, Airtran, Citation Shares, NetJets, etc. Wouldn't want you to start ranting on them either.:D


On another you'll never see regional guys on the same seniority list as mainline. It'd last about a year before they started crying how they are part of the same union and want more than $20k pay. They'd never let it happen. Would defeat the purpose of having a separate entity.

Haha...No, I get paid one of the best 50 seat rates to fly a 37 seat airplane:D Guess that means when I fly a 135 I am getting paid more than one of your chums on the 170 who is flying twice that many seats. But you're right. Good point TD. Another winner from your sharp mind:rolleyes:

Freezing boy.....first im not your son... in fact I was probably flying when you were in diapers and paying union dues when you were in elementary school. No offense intended either from or to you. LOL.

I do agree with most of your "benefits" as you described them.... pay for smaller jets is never gonna be that of our larger brothers.. thats just facts.

TD makes a point...for our pay to go up...mainline pay will have to go up...when that happens ...it will follow. As for the "other" benefits .... I agree with that frustration to a point...I can tell you when I commuted years ago that I non-reved many times even when the JS was avail just not to have to be hassled by some of the mainline CA's... fwiw I was at AE back when TurboProps was all we flew ( Early 90's ) i commuted 4-5 trips a month to either JFK or MIA and it was just easier to pay the 4 bucks and non-rev. I almost never got hassled by other mainline CA's when i JS'd .. but AA guys about 30-40% of the time just simply wanted to belittle me so I paid the non-rev fee to avoid the hassle. So YES i understand that frustration all to well.

I really dont think we are all that far apart in views here it just seems that way sometimes.

Now you're trying to change the stance of your argument. You went from trying to argue the "morals" of flying a larger aircraft for the same pay to the actual dollar number. In essence completely different debates. Pick one or the other. If you want to talk dollar then yes your pay as an FO is a little better. Considering when ours was negotiated I'd say we did very well. Our company is making money hand over fist so we'll see how the next set comes out. When it does I won't be waving it over your head.

You were basing your statements that we don't get a pay increase with an increase in seats as an FO. Guess what... You don't either. The $$$ amount you actually get paid as an FO to fly for a regional, per your argument, holds no ground and is a simple shot in the dark.. almost a post of panic as you've just realized you're ever bit the same as those you try and talk down to.

Duck,

Stop wasting your time with these guys. They wish they had 170s on their property. And before you guys start telling me the 170 belongs on mainline, I want you to go and ask 100 CAL pilots this question, "If you could have the 170 on property, will you take a seat?" I am going to go on a limb and tell you what the results will be. 100 No's and 0 Yes's. They will not leave their 73s and 75s. Good luck with that.

Oh one other thing, who would have thought that Delta would give up more scope? I love how people who do not work for CAL and try to tell everyone in the world that they will not give up scope. I am not saying they will, but you people need to stop telling me what someone else thinks.

G-dog is right about one thing....mainline guys dont want to fly 70 seat jets... if they did they would have done it.

Are you for real!?:confused: Our payrates are for 50 seat airplanes, not 37 seat airplanes. Are you saying I should ask to be paid less when I fly a 135?!

Hey, look... a couple of wh0res just showed up. Who wants to beat them?

What's that? Beat a dead horse? That's cruel, I'll beat the wh0res. At least they can fight back. :D

That's comedy!

Air Canada does it. These numbers are adjusted to approximate hourly rates since apparently they are salaried. Currently $1 US = $1.003 Canadian

AC 175/190 FO....RAH 175/190 FO
1 yr. 37/hr..........23/hr
2 yr. 42/hr..........30/hr
3 yr. 60/hr..........35/hr
4 yr. 63/hr..........36/hr

AC 175/190 CA....RAH 175/190 CA
3 yr. 114/hr........71/hr
4 yr. 116/hr........74/hr
5 yr. 118/hr........76/hr
10 yr. 130/hr.......88/hr

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

I meant no disrespect. I feel your pain. I do the same thing on CAL. I guess we'll have to agree to agree:D

Looks like somebody's been doing their homework!!!:)

So just to make clear and try to follow what you guys are discussing is that AC is using the 175/190 as a mainline a/c as oppost to the regionals here in America are using the 175/190 in a "regional jet" capacity?


atp

You are talking about a Canadian airline. I could care less about them. What I want to know is what CAL pilots would be willing to do. I will ask the question again, will CAL pilots fly the 170?

Thats in socialist Canada.... I wonder if they are subsidized by the Canadian govt..... either way.... what Air Canada does has NO effect on what US airline pilots may or may not be willing to do.... and for what its worth... the 190 is NOT a 70 seat airplane.

I bet they would. It is in everyones best interest that they do. I hope they even strike if that is what it takes to keep the scope where it is at, I'll gladly write a check to support them in that fight.

Yes, if the pay is "small narrow" pay like the 737-300/500. I don't want to see the pay rates that others have in this aircraft. We need to get pay up at all airlines. We need to create more jobs at the majors. More regional jet pay at more regional airlines will not help the careers of thousands of pilots.

CAL is all Boeing, do they want EMB's on property?
CAL could make more money if a regional flew them for less pay than CAL pilots.
Scope doesn't allow for more than 50 seat jets or 70 seat turboprops to be flown by other airlines for CAL. CAL pilots will NOT give up scope.

This may be a little straight forward....but we're all friends here right??? There is'nt and XJT pilot out there that wants to be a CHQ pilot............not one.......

Thats exactly the point that several of us have made ( refering to otto's comment about pay )...........mainline mngt wont pay you guys 737 narrowbody rates to fly the 170 is substantially smaller....... the 190 Maybe is getting close.

I dont think any of us would want CAL to give up scope, otto is right, theoretically that might create more mainline jobs... but it might not.... mgt could just as easily let the gap in acft size remain... or have more 50 seat flying.... sorta like a mexican standoff in that case. I guess their theory on allowing 70 seat TP acft is that they cant/wont/dont have the legs that a jet could have with the same load..... couse with the new Q400's they are narrowing the speed and range gap considerably.......just some thoughts.

Except for the FORMER XJT pilots I've met in IAH that came over to CHQ? His words were "Same sh!t, different airline."

I'll be honest, I skimmed through most of this thread. But here's what I came up with...XJT pilots want to be ****ed at CHQ guys. Awesome. Go for it. I'm happy when I go to work, I'm happy when I get my paycheck, and I'm happy when I'm NOT getting junior manned. I have fun hanging out with my friends that do work for XJT. You guys want to have this "Holier Than Thou" attitude, that's your thing. I personally couldn't care less....

Odd, I had 2 XJT guys in my class.. guess your figures are a little off :cool:. Whatever helps you sleep at night..

I don't think you'll see CAL agree to 737 pay for E170 pilots. Economically it doesn't make sense. But if CAL paid 170 pilots what Air Canada does, then I would be fine with it. Flying is flying and every pilot group wants to keep it on their property. I think most guys at CAL, even the old ones know it would be a mistake to give up 70 seat airplanes to a sub-contractor. But I don't work for CAL.

Air Canada is privately owned. Why shouldn't what Air Canada does effect what US airline pilots do? The US economy is larger and more robust than Canada's, the cost of living is higher in Canada but we all fly the same airplanes. I think you rejecting out of hand what another pilot group has achieved because you believe they are "socialists" is asinine and short-sighted. Just FYI, unions are not far off from socialism. If that makes me a socialist than so be it. In my opinion they set the bar where it should be. Now pilots here in the US need to man up and demand what they deserve.

Did someone steal your stapler or something. Why are you still arguing this. It is Saturday, don't you have something better to do?

How about we defend SKW's lack of a union with the fact that in the UAE unions are forbidden. After all, they fly airplanes just like we do.

I do not get any pay dif as an FO on the 767 vs. the 747 and to top it off we have the same amount of seats in the back..:rolleyes:

I know of one as well

Haha...you wasted your time to post THAT and YOU'RE asking ME if I have something better to do? Priceless. Seriously though, just got done boning the gf and now shes doing my laundry. Guess I'll go play Halo or something and let this dead horse lie:D

OUT!

I wouldn't mind being on the AA Connection side since I live in STL, but CHQ wouldn't even look at me 3yrs ago because I didn't have 1500/500. So I went to XJT and held CA in less than 2yrs and it has worked good. I won't leave the left seat for the small chance of being based at home. And in my 3yrs at XJT I have been junior manned ZERO times, so I'm not really sure how much that is worth in your contract. I guess it all depends on how well your company honors the contract. I mean, how is the whole upgrading out of seniority thing going? It sounds like the old union is hard at work on that one. We haven't had that problem at XJET. Guess thats a fair trade for the chance of being junior manned. Look, I'm really not trying to start a fight, I just want to make the point that every airline has its problems. Many people vent their frustrations at your pilot group because you guys are a big target. Is it justified? Maybe....maybe not. I will say this. I don't look down at CHQ pilots because I am an XJT pilot. Hell I don't look down at CHQ pilots period! But, I think we as XJT pilots are frustrated at other regional pilot groups as a whole because they have willingly accepted these larger airplanes for not so great pay, and that sets the bar low, and eliminates job mainline job opportunities. Some of you say the majors wouldn't buy E170s because it doesn't make sense, they are focusing on busy routes. Well I guess it is cheaper when they can pay a regional crap pay to do it instead. Some guys that now fly a 737 or A320 might say "No way I would fly a E170!", but if they staffed them with new hires that built their seniority than I bet they would be all for it. You guys have E170s and that isn't going to change. But what can change is the pay. If B.B wants to fly E170s for everyone, then make him pay the price. Raise the bar and lets get rid of this blue collar feeling. Please, help bring it back.

I agree the pay needs to be higher... and maybe with some good work it will get that way. I sorta disagree with your assertation that mainline guys even new hires really want the 70 seaters at the carrier.... AMR had the opportunity and offered the F70 to AA mainline and they could never come to an agreement on wage rates. It was many years before AE got scoped for the 700's.

I really think wishing or hoping that mainlines will start flying E170/175 is wishful thinking .... E190/195's very different animal.

I am all for raising the bar...I think we ALL are.

You may be right, but if you were at a Legacy and had the opportunity to pad your seniority with 70 seaters...would you? I think the airlines were a much different animal when the F70 was in the sky, and a lot has changed since then.

Having people below you is only beneficial in the event of a furlough, in which case you would then be flying the 70 seaters. To improve your QOL and schedule, you're gonna need people ABOVE you to leave or for your company to grow their fleet of your specific aircraft. I don't know about you guys, but when I check my seniority, I'm much more interested in how many numbers I've moved up. The number below me is just interesting to see (hiring), aside from that I have no interest in the number below... unless there is an impending furlough.

I am sorry to say but I have heard that at EVERY airline I have worked and from other pilots at other airlines.

What about the one where MX was looking over manuals for the aircraft with the same story line of you weren't supposed to see that.

Anyone that has been junior manned will tell you it's probably worth it's weight in gold. I'm glad that you haven't had to go through it, the majority of your coworkers are not so lucky...including getting junior manned into vacation.

You're either misinformed or underinformed. The company is not upgrading out of seniority order. The problem is training dates, not the awards.

I'm glad that your problems are different then ours. You're happy where you at, I'm happy where I'm at. The difference is I don't give you sh!t for being there despite the many similarities that you would refuse to acknowledge even if I listed them (do a search, I've done it before if you're interested).

I'd love to go back and forth at the circumstances surrounding our 70 seat pay rates, but I'm sure it won't do much good. Unfortunately, other things were just more important. Here's a fun fact though: We were offered Horizon + 10% on pay and turned it down to get our scope clause. That's the same scope clause that was copied almost word for word into your contract. The same one that prevented a TSA/GoJet situation over here. You're welcome.

Hopefully we will bring it back. I think we are in a great position to raise the bar pretty damn high and then I won't have to read all this "bottom feeder" crap on here. The fact of the matter is that you guys losing that CAL flying had little to do with us being a bottom feeder and a lot to do with CAL diversifying. But whatever helps you guys sleep at night is cool with me.

Preach it brotha!!! Could not have said it better myself.

I think the "animosity" or "holier than thow" attitude a lot of you guys attribute to XJT pilots is more accurately described as frustration. We are frustrated at how low some others (not talking about RAH specifically here) have set the bar and the unwillingness to change that because you all see the "regionals" as a stepping stone. Please, open your eyes. As long as there are pilot groups are out there willing to fly 70-90 seaters for regional pay, those are mainline jobs that have been outsourced to the "regional" level.

WELL SAID!

If only pilots at Delta and Northwest (and at somepoint American, United, and US Air) realized this, the industry would be in a lot better shape.

I have NEVER given any CHQ pilot sh!t for being at CHQ. Truth is I have several friends there, and CHQ was my first pick when I was job hunting but I didn't have 1500/500 and so they wouldn't even consider me.

I have never spouted that "You stole our flying!" crap. I know CAL was
diversifying. What Legacy wouldn't after what COMAIR did to Delta pre 9/11?

I don't have a problem with your contract overall. I think its good, but your 70 seat rates gotta go....up that is.

I'm sorry for the crap that you have taken from people representing my company. I just don't want to see mainline jobs outsourced to regionals. More 70 seaters at regionals means less 90 seaters at mainline, and if you can raise the bar for 70 seaters, perhaps we can stop more from coming on line.

Hey, I've got a question. I always hear CHQ talk about the "no junior man" clause. Are we talking reassignment after pairing termination or getting cold-called on your day off? Just wondering.