Our MEL states that if the door is open or unknown state, that the speed is limited to 220 KIAS or the APU has to run.

Nope, just thought about it yesterday. I'm not a Skywest pilot.

The 220kt limit is on the 700. 300kt is on the 200.

It's 200 or 7/9 dependent. At least at my carrier.

200 is 300kts 7/9 220. Or apu remains in operation.

This is a good question.

I do not work at Skywest.

Apparently people are optimistic that the 200 alt and speed limit will be lifted as it was lumped in with the 7/9 issue.

From our leader:

Clearly, even one event is unacceptable and a failure of our professional responsibilities as pilots.

We do not believe our procedures play a role; however, we will fully evaluate all aspects to continue ensuring the highest levels of safety.

It's all the pilot's fault!

You are right. A guy sitting behind a computer hundreds of miles away is responsible for low speed events causing a shaker. Certainly can't be the fault of the two ATP/typed guys who are manipulating the flight controls (or monitoring). Everyone makes mistakes, but blaming the company for low speed events due to cruise profiles/Econ speeds is a stretch. I don't think they told you to cruise within 5 knots of stall did they? Even if they did, which I doubt, still the pilots responsibility to not stall the plane. Sorry, even Skywest pilots can make mistakes. The first step is accepting and admitting that. Stop trying to shift blame.

That's all true. But the other big issue here that people conveniently ignore is the punitive stance this company memo outlines. Does no one have a problem with it? To me it speaks volumes of the safety culture.

The answer to the issue lies somewhere in the middle IMO. One or two crews messing up points to an anomaly. Enough incidents that the feds get involved to this extent points to a larger issue that is perhaps cultural and/or systemic.

Those insisting the culture of 'fly the block' has nothing to do with this need to separate their heads from the arses. Yes, at the end of the day the blame lies squarely on us, but to think it isn't a factor is looking the other way to say the least.

The company has been quite quite reasonable and non-punitive in their efforts to resolve this to date. The FAA has clearly expressed a desire to exclude these events from asap. They already have excluded events where the proper recovery procedure is not applied, on the basis that while the original mistake may been "honest" an attempt to linger at altitude in an unsafe fashion so as to cover up what happened is now an intentional violation.

SKW 200s restricted to 280 and 900s to 350
 

I'm talking about the letter itself! To me, it's very chilling when they say you will be strictly monitored by occ and the FAA. That is what is punitive! I wasn't even talking about what's actually happening behind the scenes. And speaking of which, what about the list of inattentives? That by itself instills an unjust culture.

And I wasn't talking about the FAA either. But now that you mentioned the ASAP thing, how would they even know that there was an attempt to linger at altitude in an unsafe fashion? I'm probably not understanding the whole concept of what's actually happened in these events.