So would I. I don't need a big airplane to compensate for anything.:D

Republic holds the key,if republic pilots get rates that reflect a written atp as the min standard to be an f/o we will see rates increase across the noard-but I guarantee noone is holding their breath on that.

Pilots should be paid by the size(in length) of the aircraft, not how many seats it holds, same as ship crews. Set an industry standard that changes every two years $8 a foot per captain, $5 a foot per f/o multiply length by rate then by 100 hourly max per month, a crj-200 first yr capt$69,600 f/o$43500. Plus per diem.

Or we can just buy airbus' put 76 seats in em and keep 170/175 rates.

Problem is the majors... If the majors dont pay their regional partners more everytime a regional pilot group gets a pay raise the regional will declare BK and cry they have no money and the new contract will be gone in a year.
Example A is Pinnacle... As pilots we fight a long battle at the regionals to get better contracts... but that long battle can be wipped out in one day with BK.
Its always a race to the bottom at the regionals...

Or they will build 300 seat plane with 20 across each row and pay rj rate.

You cant live in fear of something like that.The same principle says I shouldnt go outside because if I do I might catch a cold, or I shouldnt cross streets because I may be hit by a bus.

Salaries determined by aircraft size at set foot rates- more than just a great idea.

And what airport authority woukd remodel gates to accomodate such planes? Have you been to lax?

Industry wide set rates for capts/first officers, same pay at all majors, all regionals, all chrter outfits.Scope by seat is bs, who cares how many seats the airplane has when the pay is still sh!ttay ?
Thank you mainline pilots for ensuring we can fly nothing more than x amount of seats, but also for letting us keep crap pay.
When we compare an e190 to an a320 we recognize the size difference before seating capacity-pay should reflect aircraft size not variable seat capacity.

I think it would be easier to pay by mtow. There is already a precedent for that.

+1

If we're going to use the airplane to determine pay, Max Structural TOW is the only way to go. You can put as many or as few seats in it as you like.

And how exactly do you go about establishing a rate for mtow?

The same way you go about establishing one for length?

Structural or company-performance mtow? I figure length due to the fact that ar/er/xr versions are usually the same size and the 'rates' can be standardized industry wide.