I’ve always heard the same range from 6-8 as well. 6 always seemed like a good conservative number.

 

Wow a 5000 pilot seniority list is really close to 13 pilots per aircraft. Adding nearly 600 pilots to the list is going to be tough. We would need to grow the seniority list by 40 pilots every month with out fail until January 2019.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

We currently have 10.6 pilots per plane.

5.1 captains.
5.5 FOs

 

Not unfathomable. List has grown by 1200ish over the last 3 years. Definitely have to throw some more money out there to get those numbers though. We’re pushing 4500 already.

 

Thanks


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Considering just the RJ side is doing 100 a month and the ERJ classes get big in November. Shouldn’t be a problem... and attrition is usually slower in the fall/winter.. (holidays)

 

Explain to me where the conflict of interest arises? No MEC can tell any other MEC what to negotiate for or not negotiate for. The conflict of interest is fake news.

 

BS. The regionals, manned largely by young, inexperienced pilots need guidance and a road-map from on high, as well as a defined path (by labor, not managers) to the bigs. National, and the major MECs, have no incentive to help with that, since they all benefit from the B scale.

Aggravated by the fact that the junior, inexperienced (and often apathetic time building) members typically get hijacked by corrupt old-boy MEC's with the best interests of the 20+ year crowd at heart.

Of course that can happen at the majors too, but it's less of an issue because none of them just fell off the turnip truck.

 

....Have to agree with RickAir7777 here, ALPA for regionals is hardly effective. Still, it offers a better prospective of improvement over the sham that is SAPA by a huge margin. At the least, ALPA would not be on the payroll of management itself like SAPA is, which is an inexcusable conflict of interest. Also, if there was any doubt of it before, RJ is a mouthpiece for whatever management says. I find it highly unlikely that both he and SAPA were not aware of Endeavor's current TA (just two months ago) and how much bargaining potential it would have given our pilot group for a better TA than what SAPA was ramming down our throats. SAPA definitely isn't on the side of the pilots. As ineffective as ALPA would be, it would still be a substantial improvement over SAPA.

 

I've been a member on my regional MEC. You don't know what you are taking about. No one tells any MEC what to negotiate for, period. National provides attorneys and other specialist. But there are no pilots, other than those on that properties seniority list, that tell anyone anything as far as guidance on what to negotiate for.

There may be no incentive for one MEC to help another, which is precisely why no mec tells anyone else what to do. Each does what they feel is in their best interest. Most times those interest line up but sometimes they may not.

Lastly, MEC's as diverse as the demographics up the each base and seat. I'm my mec, I've seen senior, junior, old, young, reserve, line holder, instructor, men, women (in fact, one of them is an equal executive Vice President in ALPA national...oooh conflict of interest!). When I was serving, we had all those except a female.

I'm telling you, this whole ALPA conflict of interest is BS. The conflict of interest is in sapa. But if you don't like ALPA because you continue to believe it has a conflict of interest, you can certify sapa and have the best of both worlds.