Its simple. RAH CANNOT fly the mighty 170 for CAL with scope in place....period. Since CAL pilots will not cave in on scope then RAH WILL NOT be able to fly the mighty 170 for CAL....period.

 

I dont think in any quantity at least you will see large numbers of 170/175's at any mainline. The costs to the mainline to crew those aircraft just havent seemed to be where they want to go. I remember years ago when AA wanted the F70's but the pilots wouldnt fly them for what AA wanted to pay and and neither budged...hell they eventually got rid of the F100 because of the same economics. Its that exact gap that has fueled the current situation that we have today with the size of the smaller company aircraft getting larger and larger over time.

Are the pay rates at the smaller companies inadequate for the 70-80 seat market absolutly.....but there is room for some movement there.....but I dont think you are gonna convince the mainliners to fly them for what management wants them to be flown at. now the 90 seaters.. to me thats where I think the line probably is... are at least in that zone....

So sanchez am I to presume that you think any guy who takes a job with a carrier on anything bigger than 50 seats is the equivalent of a go-jet pilot?

 

Sanchez and freezingflyboy let me get this strait then. You're comparing Shuttle America, Republic, Skywest, Comair, Pinnacle, Mesaba, Colgan, Horizon, Compass, PSA, ASA, Mesa, American Eagle, and anyone else who has larger than 50 seat aircraft on property to GoJets and Freedom as being a scab? Are you actually wanting to call that many people out? We didn't invent the flying the mainlines gave it up. If you're going to talk down to someone flying larger than 50 seat aircraft then you're gong to talk down to A LOT of people. These people aren't scabs. I bet if XJT only flew 135s you guys would be saying anything over 37 seats is ruining it. Funny how it's always the "other" people. Like I said. It's up to the union and the most effective way to keep larger aircraft for flying is to support the CAL guys and anyone else in negotiations... Not flying the aircraft once it's already been negotiated, giving up QOL and pay, is just stupid. Once it's done it's done. Our company will shift it's resources as needed based on what contracts it negotiates. I didn't negotiate them the company(RAH) and THEIR pilots(CAL or whoever) did. Once there's a way for me to live in base with higher QOL I'm taking it and it won't be by stabbing anyone in the back to do it.

 

I would be ok making what I make now (and eventually what CAs here make) if it meant I was on a mainline seniority list accruing years of service at a mainline carrier and receiving mainline benefits. But thats me.

 

HELL YEAH!!! I would definitely upgrade into a 170 here at XJT because we'd be flying them for OURSELVES and be getting paid what we deserve.

 

Just what benefits do you think are all that much better at mainlines other than the pay? In general their work rules are better but im not sure anything else is all that much "better".... or is it just that you think its a "stigma" to be considered a regional pilot?

 

And you didnt answer TD's question...... are you basically saying that any of us who fly or will fly 50+ seat aircraft are likened to scabs?

 

I never called any of those folks a scab Mr. Toilet. And I don't appreciate you saying that I did What I said was that YOUR attitude (meaning you personally Toilet) of "It's out of my hands, I have to do whats best for me and only me" was very similar to that of a scab or a GoJetter. This is the exact quote, emphasis added for Toilet's benefit:

So if you can point out where in there I called every pilot flying a 50+ seat airplane a scab, I will gladly admit my mistake, issue apologies all around and withdraw the comment.

PS
It's straight, not strait. A strait is a stretch of water bordered on two sides by land.

 

Absolutely.

Mr. Toilet, let me be clear here seeing as somany need it spelled out.

IF YOU BELIEVE THAT CAL SHOULD GIVE UP SCOPE CLAUSE, THEN YOU ARE NO DIFFERENT THAN A gojets PILOT.

Now, if you fly a 70-90 seater, which rightfully has always been at mainline (up 'til the 90's), and you're ok with getting paid 50 seater rates for it, or you just simply don't see how it has diminished the flying at the legacies, then shame on you.

And if you believe your actions do not impact everyone's career, then most definitely...shame on you.

Can't get anymore clear than this!

 

No still sounds like you're comparing anyone who flies the bigger birds to a scab or gojet. Of course I'm saying I'm in it for the money and QOL. I don't know anyone who isn't. From mesa guys to UPS we all plan on getting paid. Don't you? You want to liken me to someone who's a scab because if a 170 was in my home base I'd chose to fly it and take the nice pay raise?