Will the MRJ fly at Skywest and TSA?
09-04-2016, 09:47 PM
#92
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Position: 145
Posts: 219
Originally Posted by Lambourne
Why? Because guys like you are willing to do it for a few dollars less than mainline. We have tightened the scope language we have put the rates of pay in the contract. Until guys like you stop lining up to fly those shiny jets they won't move to mainline.
Where were you in the late 90's? At my carrier we were sold a contract by our ALPA leaders that had way too many holes in scope. ALPA and the company agreed that the RJ would be used to supplement NOT replace mainline flying. They were give. 1 for 1 block hours of mainline and an ALPA oversight committee to make sure it was all legal. At an airline that operates lots of 13 hour flights that created 13, 1 hour RJ flights for the very one of our long haul segments. As they pulled down 727 and 737-200 flying on one hour segments they were replaced by guys like you jumping at the chance to fly new jet at 1/4 of the cost of a mainline pilot. That was like giving crack to airline management. They loved the whole thing.
So the pilots saw what happened and it took us until the last contact to correct the scope language. The fix is in and the tide has slowly turned in our favor on scope.
You like to paint the major pilots as the bad guys. Unless you have been at a regional since the days of all turboprop Ops then you are a big part of the problem. You had a big hand in continuing the use of RJ's. If you had said I'm not going to do that job for that wage it wouldn't have been as useful to management to kill mainline flying. If you have been at a regional since the turboprop days then you either failed major interviews or sat on the sidelines while the largest hiring boon post 1978 took place. I agree the major pilots contracts allowed for the use of RJ's but not in the manner they were implemented. However, when you look in the mirror realize you are a part of the problem also.
Where were you in the late 90's? At my carrier we were sold a contract by our ALPA leaders that had way too many holes in scope. ALPA and the company agreed that the RJ would be used to supplement NOT replace mainline flying. They were give. 1 for 1 block hours of mainline and an ALPA oversight committee to make sure it was all legal. At an airline that operates lots of 13 hour flights that created 13, 1 hour RJ flights for the very one of our long haul segments. As they pulled down 727 and 737-200 flying on one hour segments they were replaced by guys like you jumping at the chance to fly new jet at 1/4 of the cost of a mainline pilot. That was like giving crack to airline management. They loved the whole thing.
So the pilots saw what happened and it took us until the last contact to correct the scope language. The fix is in and the tide has slowly turned in our favor on scope.
You like to paint the major pilots as the bad guys. Unless you have been at a regional since the days of all turboprop Ops then you are a big part of the problem. You had a big hand in continuing the use of RJ's. If you had said I'm not going to do that job for that wage it wouldn't have been as useful to management to kill mainline flying. If you have been at a regional since the turboprop days then you either failed major interviews or sat on the sidelines while the largest hiring boon post 1978 took place. I agree the major pilots contracts allowed for the use of RJ's but not in the manner they were implemented. However, when you look in the mirror realize you are a part of the problem also.
Then at a recent job fair, I was told by delta that I really should leave my 50-seat only operator and "go to a place that flies bigger jets, especially somewhere that has 175s". I refuse to take another pay cut to fly something bigger and shinier.
Moral of the story, you seem pretty clueless on what it takes to get on at a legacy these days. I would have gladly skipped flying for a regional, but after a couple job fairs it became clear that 121 experience is what they wanted... and since they werent gojng to hire me directly to get it, my only viable option wAs a regional.
Last edited by Celeste; 09-04-2016 at 09:58 PM.
09-04-2016, 09:52 PM
#93
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2013
Position: DL
Posts: 136
Originally Posted by Avroman
Let me give you a hint on this one... There are 3 companies flying 50 seat RJ's for Delta today. 1. Republic, already parking their fleet of E-145's to focus solely on 76 seat airplanes (tried to do this before but Delta invoked their extension clause... probably to speed their path to bankruptcy) 2. Endeavor Air, Wholly owned by Delta and as such can add or park planes here with no penalty (no need to offer anything in return for sending them back to Arizona) 3. SkyWest Inc. (SkyWest/ExpressJet (old ASA) Has Delta by the short n. curlies with owning half the gates in the C concourse in ATL and has already shown they are willing to trade 50 seaters for 76 on a 2 for 1 basis.
I predict if DALPA agrees to more 76 seat jets for the end of 50 seat jets, they will all go to SkyWest and Endeavor will become an 81 airplane airline (unless GoJet is eliminated and those planes are moved to Endeavor)
I predict if DALPA agrees to more 76 seat jets for the end of 50 seat jets, they will all go to SkyWest and Endeavor will become an 81 airplane airline (unless GoJet is eliminated and those planes are moved to Endeavor)
09-05-2016, 05:03 AM
#95
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2013
Position: DL
Posts: 136
Originally Posted by Al Czervik
Regional and mainline pilots should be on the same page about where these should be flown. The fact that there is disagreement over this is not a good sign.
09-05-2016, 05:30 AM
#96
:-)
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,339
Originally Posted by Al Czervik
Regional and mainline pilots should be on the same page about where these should be flown. The fact that there is disagreement over this is not a good sign.
09-05-2016, 07:46 AM
#97
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2015
Position: Guppy Gear Slinger
Posts: 1,863
Originally Posted by Bobman80
I may have been ambiguous. I very much care about scope. I don't care if SkyWest or some other regional parks their 50 seat RJs.
09-05-2016, 08:25 AM
#98
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: EMB145
Posts: 772
Originally Posted by Mesabah
What muddies the water, is the issue of market share, Delta just can't get rid of Skywest if they choose to fly these jets in place of the aging CRJs. The mainline scope contract doesn't have a remedy in this situation, due to the "factors beyond the company's control" clause. Thus the Delta pilots will likely receive a large payout, and Skywest will fly them.
09-05-2016, 08:58 AM
#100
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Position: CRJ FO
Posts: 648
Originally Posted by Turbosina
Right, because you got yours! Who cares how other guys get their experience as long as you're secure, right?
Regionals once upon a time flew nothing but turboprops, including Skywest, from hub to small community.
Then in 92 the first rj shows up at comair. At Skywest the rj shows up in 94 and they remain at 10 for several years.
Come the 2000's, what was only supposed to be a 50 seater becomes a 66 seater, then 70, then 76. What was supposed to be a 53,000 lbs plane became a 86,000lbs plane no longer flying from slc-ida, but rather sfo-Msp.
Guys used to fly their 1900/Saab340/emb120, upgrade and within a few years move on to the panel of a 727 or right seat of a small narrow body flying to places like bis, fsd, cos, eug, sba. You get the point.
And now guys say what the big deal if the MRJ weighs a few thousand pounds more ? All so you can play pilot on the weekend and fly your shinny new jet with wing mounted engines?
Got it.
Just one question: when people ask you who you fly for do you tell them you fly for Skywest or for the parter of the day United/delta/ Alaska?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
