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 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

 

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. 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.


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 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

 

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.