Regionals: feeders or outsourcing?
 

So my question is, what direction are we going here with the regionals. In the past we seemed to be more of just a feeder for the majors. Now it seems we are just outsourcing company's. With skyw's crj 90's etc, is it just a matter of time before we do all the flying for united for 1/3 of the price?

I think the "replacement jet" phenomenon will soon reach an equilibrium for these reasons...


1) Larger mainline airplanes are more effecient (as long as you can fill them up). RJ's are only effective narrow-body replacements on routes where the NB was not full, or where more frequency is required to meet customer needs, ie an am & pm RJ flight instead of one daily NB.

2) There are two artificial cost advantage for the RJ's...the crew is cheaper in general, and as long as there is growth, lot's of new-hires on first-year pay REALLY drive it down.

3) But this will not last forever...once the RJ's have covered all the routes that make economic sense, growth will stop and regional crews will climb the longevity scale. Overall crew costs will rise, negating further NB replacement benefits.

4) The current crop of RJ's were not designed with transcon range...most of the 300 million americans live on or near one of the two coasts, and often want to visit the OTHER coast.

5) Hopefully mainline learned it's lesson and will tighten up on the scope from here on out.

6) Mainline compensation is down, so they are harder to undercut.

7) Eventually RJ pilots will get sick of working for peanuts, and newbies will lose interest in $18K jobs (maybe).

LOL.... he said newbies will loose interest!

I would hope for the same, but the sad fact is that we've both been around long enough to know better. You do make some really good points, however. I enjoy reading your posts.

Great post rickair7777, Do you know any of the specifics on mainline's scope's? I would hate to see my major job, (if I stay in the profession), outsourced.

It varies company-to-company, but basically 100 seats is always mainline territory, 50 seats is RJ-land, and the area in between is negotiable.

USAir/AW: Pretty high seat limit, they were the first 900 customers.

DAL: About 70ish

UAL: 70ish

NWA: 50-70? They had a special one-time provision for the 146's

AA: 70ish

CAL: ? (but I don't see any big RJ's over there )


I'd like to see it all go to 50 seats.

Whats the deal with skyw's 76 seat config, for the dal 90's? I think I remember hearing something like there are only a limited number allowed, and after a certain time period.
Do those scope's expire?
Yeah I would like to see it all go to 50 as well.
Please excuse my ignorance on the subject.

The 900's are still under the DAL scope limit. They got 900's to have room for more first class seats, I think the scope addresses seat numbers, but not class.

Have to argue this point, I'm afraid there will always be the new starving CFI that's willing to fly a "state-of-the-art, glass cockpit" CRJ for nothing. I've always seen it as the plague of pilots...we'll do it for nothing sometimes.

I can't believe Skywest is going to operate the CRJ 900 for such low pay. It makes me sick. Skywest is a good Airline with good employees and you guys need to grow a pair unionize and put an end to this BS. Mesa, Go Jets, Chautakeaway I can see this happening but not at Skywest. As long as carriers are willing to sell their soul like this, legacy carriers will continue to outsource making A future in this industry difficult.

The problem here at skyw is to many ignorant new guys who have no interest in making the industry a better place. I have hear it time and time again, we have it better than mesa, why would we screw that up with a union. They plan on getting there pic time and moving on, leaving skyw to lower the bar hacking at scope clause. I think they will look back and realize they screwed themselves when they are furloughed because some kid, or hobbyist(if thats a word), is flying their 787 for 18k a year. I hope dal/united stay strong with scope.......

How about if Major carriers had RJs/props on their certificate/seniority list. Fly the RJ/prop for 2-3years and get crappy pay, then move on to the better payscales flying a bigger plane. At least then people would go to a company they like and stay there without the need to sell-out for PIC turbine time. There wouldnt be 5 different carriers flying for 1 major, it would all be the same under 1 company eliminating the under-cutting at the regional level. Each company would have an incredibly strong pilot group, imagine going on strike and shutting down every airplane the company flies from a turboprop to a heavy 777. Pretty good barganing chip!

Thats how it used to be years ago at places like American, Continental and US Air. I know at Eagle and Continental Express you would get an American or Continental seniortity number and when your number came up, you moved on over. But then the mainline carriers realized they could save bunches of money by pitting the regionals against each other and here we are today.

Last time I saw thier contract (a couple years ago),
CAL's scope allowed unlimited 50 seat flying. I assume it is still limited because ther are no 70 seaters over there.

US's scope allows a specific number of "Large Small Jets" to be flown. (70-90 seats) I think its in the ballpark of 80 planes. There is some discussion going on now about scope violations due to Mesa operating thier 900s in CLT. The guys in Tempe say that since Mesa was flying them for HP before the merger they don't count...

The new ALPA president John Prater had something like this on his campagn platform. I think his terminology was along the lines of "Make the Airline Brand Owners (read: majors) responsible for the careers of all pilots flying under that brand"

Anybody still have his campaign email, or know if his website is still up?

Thanks for the info.