Says the person who's already shown his colors by taking a paycut. Your company is out of branded and still showing a loss. Gonna take a second one? You never cease to amaze!

If you're referring to the United flying, it's not a CPA, if you bother educating yourself instead of running your mouth like you've always have, you'd know that it's a temporary flying gig booked through the Charter department.

Funny how our 50 seat jet pay is still higher than yours even after the paycuts, which you have no idea how I voted for by the way (another sign of you running your mouth without knowing what your talking about).

You're right we posted a loss last quarter, but at least we're not posting a profit at the expense of taking mainline jobs, like I don't know Midwest for instance.

I know perfectly well it's not CPA. I've never stated it was. All I said was the company is still operating at a loss. Considering a paycut was taken to offset the loss but it didn't work I wouldn't be surprised if another was coming in the future. I'm glad your 50 seat rate is higher. I flew with a CA here who's wife is a CA there and he walks away with more, funny:cool:

Yeah it is, just as many other companies are, but the losses have been less and less form quarter to quarter, and charter is working out well. As far as your captain friend, there are too many variables to determine why he's making more, but apples to apples our guys make more on the same equipment, sorry welcome to reality, why don't you put your energy into getting mainline rates for that mainline aircraft you guys are getting in a couple of months?

So a Captain at Republic, who flies 20 more seats, makes more than than Captain at ExpressJet. Who would have thought?

Actually, the paycut was to minimize the loss that would be taken by the new CPA that CAL squeezed XJT into. It wasn't taken as an offset or reaction to loss incurred with the start up of branded, or the pro rate DelCon aircraft.

All that happened when LOA 9 went down is Ream told Kellner how cheap he will be.

No I will not accept it, I am just saying. In fact I answered this in another thread. http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/re...tml#post623007

We are currently operating on a contract which in 2003 averted a whipsaw and got us internal scope. We also had nothing larger than a 50 seat jet at the time. From what I understand we have already been to the table on pay scale. Everything has come to impasse of course, I am hoping the pilot group has the back bone to do the right thing. I just hope if we get those payrates I can afford to retire or don't loose my seat when the furloughs hit once someone underbids our pay scales. And that will happen, ask the comair guys how standing up for whats right worked out for them. I wish everyone else would have stood with them. We'd all be in better shape if they had. <side note:I wasn't in the industry at the time.>

Depends on how you look at it. If there was no ACA contract 2001, there wouldn't have been TSA getting a better deal than what they had, the COMAIR contract 01, and AWAC's that followed later.

Just like had NW not sacked up and walked, there might not have been UAL 2000, DAL, with AA next at bat.

We all know the what and the why of how NONE of those companies pilots have it as good as they did. But making the statement of "ask the (insert guys) how standing up for whats right worked out for them" is a little short sighted.

Do you think that they SHOULDN'T have stood up? Even if none of the above listed carriers achieved the rates they did, they STILL would have been squeezed post 9/11.