Both. You could be reassigned, but you have to be back in base within 2 hours of your original end time.

Both. I'd have to look it up, but I believe we can't be extended more than 2 or 4 hours on the last day of a trip.

*EDIT* looks like G Dog beat me to it

The best CA I ever flew with is an F/O at CHQ on the 170, we called him Flava Flav........... Gotta love the Italian guy, flying with him made Colgan tolerable.

Well, if you get called on your day off and are stupid enough to answer the phone thats your own damn fault. I don't care what company you're at. Let 'em leave a message. If you don't like what they have to say, don't call em back.

Dodging a junior manning assignment on your day off is pretty easy as long as you don't answer the phone. However, like was stated above...they cannot schedule you more than 2 hours after pairing termination. Should the company get a hold of you on your day off or ask you to fly beyond that 2 hours...you can basically laugh at them and hang up if you so desired. It basically means crew sked can't hunt you down at the end of a pairing. Once you're off...you're off.

Freezingflyboy, Johnso, et al -

Believe me when I say that we share your frustration in the 70 seat rates. But like I said before, they had to take the lesser of two evils (I say "they" because I wasn't a part of the group when this was all negotiated). Personally, without our scope clause we'd have higher pay but a lot of our pilots would have been on the street had the company been able to set up Republic as an alter-ego as opposed to the one list, one contract we have now. So, instead of fighting for pay and losing guys, they lived to fight another day...which is now. This is the first negotiation since those rates were set up and I trust that our guys in the negotiating room will do what is right. I also trust that our pilot group will not lower the bar but raise it.

While it's not much of an excuse, there wasn't a single 170 on the horizon when that contract was negotiated and I believe many people thought it was a pipe dream that it would even come here (at least that's what I'm told). Low and behold, once the ink was dry here they came. While I'm remiss to call it a mistake on our part, it certainly didn't help matters. Keep in mind most of you at AWAC, XJT, etc. have been slowly bettering your contract over 30+ years. We've had one in place for a third of that time and I think ours is pretty damn competitive in a lot of areas with the rest of the industry. While it may not be the best in ALL areas, I do believe it is the best in some. Problem is, it's also the worst in some as far as clarity and wording are concerned. Like I said before though, I'm pretty hopeful that it won't go anywhere but up from here...especially with a company as profitable as ours.

What burns me is being called a bottom-feeder when my work rules and my W2 are comparable to most of my friends in the industry. Of course, I'm just a 50 seat guy so I can't speak for the widebody fliers. We all have different problems at every carrier, but some how ours are "worse" than everyone elses. It also bothers me because I came to CHQ specifically because they WEREN'T bottom-feeders. I tried to find a regional that included a reasonably quick upgrade, good pay, attractive bases, and decent work rules. I came up with CHQ...then they closed MCO. But, 3 outta 4 ain't bad.

Sharky

You know our contract was post 9/11 when it was definitly hitting the fan in the industry right? The 170's weren't part of it as I understand. I think they did an excellent job considering what was going on in the industry. I asked about XJT's prior to 9/11 and was told this.
Those are some crazy figures. My point is that your new contract was negotiated based on where the other companies were standing. Your extra couple bucks an hour didn't show up till recent. With RAH making great money I think we'll all be very happy with our new contract and should be something we're all proud of yet again raising the industry standards.

if i was at chq i would not be too excited or rubbing my pants over flying 70 seaters for CO. not only is there scope, starting a base in newark , but you also STILL have to win the bid for the flying. Your airline has already proved by its rocky start up that CO doesnt care about level of service. They want the bottom line for meat in the seat. They want to pit regionals against each other for flying. When you pit CHQ with a "new" contract (where they dont get paid 50 seat wages to fly 70) against a mesa or other REALLY low end undercutter you are going to lose. There will be a lot of competition for that flying... i am at xjt and i know we wont get the 70 seat flying even if we started that airframe and bid low because CO doesnt want one or two main groups. They want many divided, ****ed off groups, working for peanuts, that are too worried about their job to see the big picture. We fly the airplanes but as a whole we are pawns of upper management.

toilet your views on "well i will get mine attitude" is kind of disgusting. Its like running head first into a tree that you cant see... keep dreaming about a nice contract, CO giving up scope (tell me again how you dont want it! it makes me laugh), more 70 seaters.... and then when you do go to CO you might be furloughed because of some lowball bidder like MESA and their "lawyers" dangle just the right amount of propoganda to ease scope.

Bottomline: CHQ, XJT, or any company with a halfway decent contract will not win a bid for new flying with CO. It is going to be another carrier with lower overhead and bad work rules.... Colgan could be it, could be Mesa. sounds like your mythical stock boy might have to sell those airplanes to chinese schookids who don't know any better

keep in mind that CHQ was not the lowest bidder on this last RFP. So its not just about the cheapest "meat in the seat". Yes we did have a very rocky start up with continental but I think our performance has shown to improve to a much higher level. I am agreement with everyone here that CAL mainline giving up scope would be a horrible thing. I heard the rumors of 170s for CAL in the crew room the other day and I said "if CAL pilots give up scope I am leaving the industry"

If it were up to me, mainline would get over their "little pilot syndrome" and take back over any aircraft with turbojets on it period. regardless of how many seats you have in the back. Look at foreign carriers, it seems to work for them.

Face it we do so much b****** back and forth at one another about regional x vs regional y and scope this and scope that, your a scab, gojet sucks. Look at whos fault it is, its the mainline dinosaurs back in the 80s that couldnt get over their own little man syndrome and keep all aircraft on property with one list.

What surprises me is how much of that rocky startup is attributed to CHQ. I flew that codeshare the first couple of months of it's inception and the support from ground crews at almost every station was non-exsistent at best, borderline hostile at worst. It has since improved, but their willingness to work with the crews is absolutely horrible.

Case in point: The weight restriction. CAL will just start rebooking people without even talking to the crew to see what we can actually carry based on what gets loaded in the back. They reassigned 10 people when we could have taken a full boat without ever talking to us. The only reason I found out is cuz I called Ops asking where the other 10 people were since we were told to expect a full flight. But of course, those reassignments just get coded as CHQ being weight restricted.

I could careless what they say about me in the break room behind my back. For right now, I have to work with them and they have to work with me. The only way that's gonna work is if we're both trying to get a good product out. Funny how CHQ's "rocky start" at CAL is nowhere near reflected in their operations for AA, DAL, US, UAL, or F9. I'm not saying we're perfect...but neither is the CAL side and they're doing a lot more to f*ck us then help us.

My "Well I will get mine attitude"? Please explain. Yes I'll say it again I don't think anything over 50 seats should be a regional, BUT, they are already here and aren't going anywhere. I'm realistic. A nice contract is to be expected. Why would you say thinking we are going to get one is daydreaming? During the worst time of the industry the RAH pilot group managed to still come out with a great one. Someone has to play the devil's advocate and point out logic about what COULD happen. Never think I support these actions or wish for them. My interest is in my future. Everything I do now is in preparation for it and yes I will get mine. Might be 1 year or 15 years but I'll get what I want. That's what hard work earns you. Just a matter of time.

Ughhh....not this noise again.:rolleyes: We worked with the hardstands in IAH for YEARS. You guys whined about it for a few months and CAL built you those sheds. Happy? Just FYI, most of the CAL ground personnel refer to CHQ as the "special needs" airline.:D Seriously though, I think it comes down to frustration from everyone in the CAL system. Kellner is not well liked (I've heard him referred to as "worse than Lorenzo" for those of you who know what means). The general feel here is that CAL had a good system in place with ExpressJet and Mainline and Larry is f*cking it up with all this CHQ mess. Ooooooh well.

Really? Most of the ground crews I talked to down there said, "Thank God you guys are here."
Oh well, you suckas can have IAH. I'll miss the overnights, but I sure won't miss the operations.

Hell, I've worked off hardstands before CAL came along. It's no big shock. The big shock is waiting around for 45 minutes to get a single person near your airplane. Take your frustration out on Larry. He's the one who took your flying. He's the one who put it up for bid. He's the one that awarded it to CHQ. Basically what you're saying is "Well, you guys bid on flying so it's all your damn fault". That makes sense.

Probably mistook your ERJ for ExpressJet:D

Now that I think about it, they probably just meant me in particular. :cool:

Nope. Didn't take MY flying. He took his CAL's flying and put it up for bid and ended up with a carrier that was not prepared to handle it and that does not do business in a way that Larry is accustomed to. Its his right as CEO. There's no law against being a moron.

Haha...you're probably right.:D

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

just wait until we get your XRs and then we will be happy!

I need to add one more thing to my "Facts of Life" list:

5. Every 1-2 months we will have a thread on APC talking about "XJT vs. CHQ" where pilots from both carriers will dig up the most random crap they can to make themselves feel right. Nothing will be accomplished and no opinions will be swayed.

I fly in and out of IAH on regionals, both XJT and CHQ, and can say it isn't anyone's fault. I can't tell you how many times I've sat there waiting for a gate agent to let the plane unload. I never understood why you have to sit there for 10 minutes waiting to simply let people walk off the plane into the covered terminal that's a mere 30ft away.

CAL does something most places don't and that's deliver a good customer experience. Good customer experience and on-time performance DO NOT go hand in hand. Countless times they keep calling and waiting on that last pax that shows up 5min late then rush them out to the plane, argue with the crew for a minute or two saying they need them to be taken, then another minute or two waiting to see if there is room for their bags, then because one sheet is already filled out the FO has to start a complete new one which takes a couple more minutes. This seems to be the story every single time. I won't lie I've done it once. They held the plane for a few minutes for me because they knew i was running through the terminal to jumpseat home.

Regardless of what you guys think about the CHQ vs XJT operation there one thing is certain and that's customers are happy with CAL and the way they do business. Granted it'd be much easier if they were just A'holes and denied pax left and right like Delta but their concern isn't about our job being easier it's about the pax. Personally I love flying Continental. I go first class everywhere. Other places usually don't let you.

Yeah. Wouldn't hold my breath on that one.

You're right but we all jump in feet first and have a ball for a few days. Hope no ones taking anything personally.

What Continental are YOU talking about!?:confused:

If they are they haven't been here long enough lol. BTW someone emailed me XJT's contract pre-2001 if anyone's interested. It's interesting to see how things have changed and how dramatically they have changed. Not just at XJT but in the industry. Perfect example why we expect nothing but progress in our next contract.

PS. Mark Bulger was the worst damn pick I've ever made for Fantasy Football. If you want to really hurt my feelings nail me for that lol.

I was wondering the same thing. I'll take a Delta gate agent having a bad day vs. a CAL agent having a good day :D I've seen some interesting folk bouncing around on the mainline side of that carrier....

The one out of IAH I've flown my entire life. They provide excellent service to me every time I'm there. They put me in first class and give me meals. I do make the effort to make eye contact and shake the hands of everyone though. Seems to help. One CA told me he hadn't had anyone actually come into the cockpit and do that in a good while then said to take a seat in first class.

"Ladies and gentlemen, good afternoon from the flight deck. I'd like to apologize to the 49 of you onboard for our delay; we've been waiting 10 minutes for our last passenger to arrive and have now missed our slot for O'Hare. ATC has informed us that our new Expect Departure Clearance Time is approximately two hours from now, so the gate agents have begun work to rebook all of you who will miss your connections."
But hey, at least they got that one passenger on :rolleyes:

it was kind of a joke. but I wouldnt doubt to see them go somewhere. Dont get me wrong I have heard nothing but good things about XJET airlines, but its very hard to make money on 50 seaters. I know they were planning on a loss for the next few years but they need their contracts with Continental to keep the cash coming in to fund their side business project. But really I wish XJET the best of luck but I dont see branded flying on 50 seaters as a very good investment.

My bet is they get in more with another airline and quit the branded then sell the ticket. Are they a member of skyteam or anything like that? Be hard to fly if they aren't.

Well using CHQ and CRJ-200's was not a good investment either, but Larry didnt seem to care. Also no offense but your a pilot, not our CEO, so what you think is a good investment is irrelevant :)

Typically the only time they hold flights for just a few pax is on the last flight of the night, when there is no seats for the next day or two (happens a lot going to Mexico) or if there is only 1 flight a day to the destination (again, typically to Mexico destinations). I'm sure any other airline would do the same thing. Now, IAH-DFW or ATL or ORD? Nope, you can go grab a cup of coffee and wait for the next flight in an hour or so. Now as far as holding a flight for a jumpseater? That sounds pretty far-fetched. No flight I've ever been working has been held for a jumpseater. Imagine trying to explain that to a CP:rolleyes:

I know it was a joke. Flying the 50 seaters may not seem like the best business decision. But an even worse business decision is letting 25% of your fleet go to your competition. Thats why I can't believe Larry and CHQ CEO Whatshisname were so surprised that XJT kept the airplanes. The decision by CAL to drop XJT was not a cost-based decision. CHQ is more expensive (not including the operational...shortfalls) and DAL is more than happy to pay the same rates CAL was. Bottom line, I wouldn't start day dreaming about those XRs just yet. My money is betting they aren't going anywhere.

operational short falls? funny how express jet was #5 the Forbes top ten list of worst airlines and CHQ/Republic wasn't in the top (bottom) ten.

http://www.forbes.com/2007/09/26/air...Speed=20000%20

On-time performance: 73% (ninth worst)

Baggage mishandling: 8.9 per 1,000 passengers (fifth)

Cancellation rating: 3.4% (fourth)

Yeah genius, its called Newark, NJ (EWR)

Do all of your planes have ACARS?????????? Thats what I thought ;)

SAAB - you're acting like a douchebag again.

Not to mention CHQ has a small operation in IAH compared to XJET. Apples to oranges king10pin02.

That's a pretty ignorant statement there champ. Our on time and completion factor is right up there with XJet's. The only people I keep hearing complaining about CHQ at CAL is XJET pilots. Even the Ops and ground agents have started backing off.

For the record, CAL decides when we cancel flights, not XJT.

Relax, I know you guys are getting your stuff together and the bashing of COLGAN will start to begin here in Newark, instead of the CHQ bashing :) it's human nature, this CHQ deal affected a lot of people here at XJT. I know you guys had nothing to do with it, but still kinda fun to bust your balls. Its a pride thing I guess, I dunno Im not trying to be a Douchebag, just making a comment that would appear funnier to you if we were drinking a beer at a bar as opposed to reading it on the net :)