When I Think of this Pilot Group the words whipped and Neutered comes to mind.....

How that place operates at all is a mystery......

In 2005 the NWA Pilots took action to amend our BK contract and it was changed in A matter of day's......

Oh don't you wish nobody flew them for you guys. Those aircraft ARE 90 SEAT AIRFRAMES!!

please tell me your not THAT ignorant, all it takes one swipe of the pen and a day in the MX hanger.

And you must come to this forum to beat your chest? Lame.

What sir, are your real problems? We're here to help!

Even if we allowed it, they wouldn't be configured to 90 seats. Even the 70 seaters are running around at 65 or so seats so they can have first class.

Not that I agreed with allowing more jumbo RJs, but you need to be educated on reality.

No, I do not need an education. I'll be sure and snap a picture of that "not a 90 seat" airframe and post it here for all to see... Maybe it is you and all your DAL buddies who need and education. Those airframes CAN be configured with 90 seats, and they are currently flying around in DAL colors.

The camel not only has his nose under your tent, he's sitting at the table drinking YOUR beer...

Yeah, and 320's can be configured to 180 seats. But ours are configured to 150 seats. The CRJ700's were configured to 70 seats, but they removed 4 seats. It's all about the revenue. Plus, our scope only allows 76 seats. It's never allowed more then that since the first CRJ900 entered DCI service.

It's funny how people chastise the Delta pilots for their scope, yet we have no one on involuntary furlough along with some of the best pay, retirement, and work rules.

Scope is normally by seat limit and not airframe max seating. Of course you can write scope anyway you want. Size airframe. Weight. Seats. Personally, I think it should be "all flying/tickets sold/etc should be from our airline and employees, but that's just me.

I certainly agree with you on that.

Really?? Seems that the CRJ-900 is "marketed" and capable of 90 seats. Stating the obvious, your current PWA/CBA dictates provisions of "76 seats" which are config'ed by a two class cabin, we get that.

Plain and simple....The CRJ-900 is capable of 90 seats. Don't believe, you can read more via the link below. Here's some high-lights:
"The CRJ900 is a stretched 76-90 seat version of the CRJ700."
Bombardier CRJ700 series - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What have we learned here......The "CRJ-900" is "capable" of 90 seats. Will that be Mgt's next bite since the airframes are currently present?? I hope not, we're rooting for you.



Correct, with a "Gold Star".
SkyWest CRJ-700's (under UAL Colors) that are in two class config total 66 seats (6/60). COULD these airframes hold "70 seats"?? You betcha!! Just like the CRJ-900 being capable of "90 seats".

"Pot meet Kettle" per your ^^^opening comments^^^ and condescending tone?

Agree completely and am expecting our two MEC's, (CAL and UAL's), to exceed your contract by light years. As it stands right now, our JNC is neglecting their jobs by not using pattern bargaining and hawking something that shouldn't see the light of day.