Just more propaganda that these airline managers will send to the press in order to get the support of the public to repeal the ATP and / or new rest rules.

There is no shortage and as pilots, we need to make sure that message is heard loud and clear. There is only a shortage of airlines willing to pay a competitive compensation package for pilots.

What's the old pilot saying?

"No bucks, then no Buck Rogers"

Time to bring the money to the table Bryan Bedford!

 

This, times a bazillion.

Shortage of pilots in one particular segment of the aviation industry does not mean a scarcity of pilots industry-wide.

 

Hmmm..What did the letter say about CLE ?:

"Our h
ub in Cleveland hasn’t been profitable for over a decade, and has generated tens of millions
of dollars of annual losses in recent years. We simply cannot continue to bear these losses. "

A DECADE....

"No city has been more supportive of its hub carrier, and no group of employees has been more dedicated to providing great service, but the demand for hub-level connecting flying through
Cleveland simply isn’t there. "

See also CVG,PIT....

"While our decision to reduce our flying was driven by our continued losses in Cleveland, the timing of the flight reductions has been accelerated by industry-wide effects of new federal regulations that impact us and our regional partner flying. Those new regulations have caused mainline airlines to hire regional pilots, while simultaneously significantly reducing the pool of new pilots from which regional carriers themselves can hire. Although this is an industry issue, it directly affects us and requires us to reduce our regional partner flying, as several of our regional partners are beginning to have difficulty flying their schedules due to reduced new pilot availability. "

"New pilot availability",i.e.,300 hour ATP wonders...

"We need to reduce that flying in our most unprofitable markets, which unfortunately are out of Cleveland."

Unprofitable....

 

He should have just sent this to his lobbyists and reps in Washington, who it was clearly written for, instead of bothering the employees.

And I too am curious why they can't staff the UAL CHQ operation, but the DAL operation is fine?

 

I've been saying for at least a year that a tsunami was approaching the regionals beach and they've been in denial. Now, it seems they are finally spotting the approaching wave, but are STILL in denial about its true cause. The 1500 hour rule and age 65 are NOT the true cause, they are contributing factors. The TRUE cause is the unwillingness for regional (and mainline) carriers to provide attractive compensation, schedules and treatment to aspiring pilots. Too many have correctly determined that this profession isn't worth the investment considering the meager returns. Until they face the crisis their greed has created, it will only get worse.

They underestimate the size and power of the approaching wave and I fear they will not understand that until ATTER it slams into their beach and they're screaming in terror. They've got 12-18 months before true impact.

 

Spend $200k for an associates or bachelors degree and a wet CMEL/CFI ticket just for the honor of making $24k....nope.

I wonder if the RAA is setting the stage for the MPL...

 

BB has a lot of denial of reality in his head, doesn't he? Increase PAY and QOL and your problem is solved, buddy. That advice is free (and obvious).

 

First I feel for the employee's who will be directly impacted with bases closing etc (pilots, ramp, Flight attendants).

However, in my opinion I am happy to see some of the regional excessive feed being reduced. Doesn't this present an opportunity for leverage for pilots and also allow the possibility of mainline having to look at adding new aircraft?

I hope RAH can use this as leverage to obtain a contract soon.

 

^^^This

As long as there is a democratic front in the White House, there will be no repeal. With Hilary in the mix, sorry airlines, the Republican Party has nothing that can contend.

Im not supporting either party, I'm just stating the facts is that a repeal would take a Republican led office.

Also, what politician wants to say "Fellow voters, your safety is not my concern and we need pilots so we are lowering the minimums to fly." That would be a tough statement to sale. The stronger push would be tax incentives for airlines since there is a so called "pilot shortage". Time will tell...

 

Correct me with a quote if I'm wrong, but I believe airline management were the ones who lobbied way back to get us put under the RLA and the A4A still supports that. It also occurs to me that Republicans are the favored party of management. Since Democrats are the favored party of unions, and the unions want out of the RLA, it would seem Democrats are more likely to do that. But then if you really get into it with the unions, you'll hear that they also enjoy some of the provisions of the RLA like Section 6 and status quo. So maybe both sides support the RLA?

Either way, it's Congress, not the White House that decides any of it. Political novices give the WH way too much credit. Other than executive orders and war powers the WH really doesn't have much power. Just the bully pulpit.