JetBlue looking to merge
04-07-2026 | 10:00 AM
#111
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,578
Likes: 286
From: DOWNGRADE COMPLETE: Thanks Gary. Thanks SWAPA.
You know what they used to call 50-100 seat jet airliners before the "regional jet" was introduced?
Mainline.
DC9, Bac1-11, Fokker 28, Fokker 100, BAe 146, 737-200.
All good paying MAINLINE jobs with MAINLINE benefits, and MAINLINE retirement.
Choosing to call an airplane "regional" in order to pay employees less was genius by management and the biggest failure in the history of ALPA.
Mainline.
DC9, Bac1-11, Fokker 28, Fokker 100, BAe 146, 737-200.
All good paying MAINLINE jobs with MAINLINE benefits, and MAINLINE retirement.
Choosing to call an airplane "regional" in order to pay employees less was genius by management and the biggest failure in the history of ALPA.
Taken to an even further extreme, some of our own snub their nose at the E-195 & A-220 as “regional jets”. 🙄
04-07-2026 | 11:03 AM
#112
Furloughed Again?!
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 4,950
Likes: 110
From: Boeing 737
that's insane given that USAir, American, and JetBlue all flew the E190, and both Delta and JetBlue fly the A220 - an airplane with roughly the capacity of a 737-700 and longer range.
04-07-2026 | 11:05 AM
#114
Thread Starter
Line Holder
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 654
Likes: 132
From: 737CA
With respect to how many seats... that would be up to SWAPA. I will also vote NO on any SL's or TA's if it includes giving away any of our scope. In fact, I'm still pretty farking raw over allowing interisland Hawaii flying done by subcontractors even though we still do it. If our company wants to fly 175's, they can talk to SWAPA and hash out the rates, but it will be flown by pilots on our seniority list, not subcontractors. Look at the bright side.... as I said, ERJ170 type covers everything from 170 to 195 - a whole range of seats, configurations and options. The gauge of the metal they want to use is up to the company - same type rating.
The bottom line is SWA cost's and it's current business model don't support it. JBLU(190) parked them, Breeze(195) parked them. Spirit, Frontier and SWA don't have them for a reason. They don't work in that business model. If you begin to see more connections at SWA over the next few years and more importantly yields improve, then I think its something to be serious about. It took them ten years to figure out partnerships. Granted it was a different regime though.
04-07-2026 | 11:24 AM
#115
Line Holder
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 1,576
Likes: 146
From: Left
So what you are saying is you are willing to fly EMB 170's under SWAPA's scope? What the company heard was "you guys want to fly RJ's for SWA?" Be careful how you play that game. You are willing to alter scope as long as it's SWAPA pilot's. SWA would take that offer in a heart beat.
The bottom line is SWA cost's and it's current business model don't support it. JBLU(190) parked them, Breeze(195) parked them. Spirit, Frontier and SWA don't have them for a reason. They don't work in that business model. If you begin to see more connections at SWA over the next few years and more importantly yields improve, then I think its something to be serious about. It took them ten years to figure out partnerships. Granted it was a different regime though.
The bottom line is SWA cost's and it's current business model don't support it. JBLU(190) parked them, Breeze(195) parked them. Spirit, Frontier and SWA don't have them for a reason. They don't work in that business model. If you begin to see more connections at SWA over the next few years and more importantly yields improve, then I think its something to be serious about. It took them ten years to figure out partnerships. Granted it was a different regime though.
Let’s not forget the union push for codeshare 2 contracts ago, calling it good codeshare. Also CK talking about giving up scope, saying it is flying SWAPA will never get to fly anyway.
04-07-2026 | 11:56 AM
#116
Spikes the Koolaid
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 435
Likes: 16
From: 737
So what you are saying is you are willing to fly EMB 170's under SWAPA's scope? What the company heard was "you guys want to fly RJ's for SWA?" Be careful how you play that game. You are willing to alter scope as long as it's SWAPA pilot's. SWA would take that offer in a heart beat.
The bottom line is SWA cost's and it's current business model don't support it. JBLU(190) parked them, Breeze(195) parked them. Spirit, Frontier and SWA don't have them for a reason. They don't work in that business model. If you begin to see more connections at SWA over the next few years and more importantly yields improve, then I think its something to be serious about. It took them ten years to figure out partnerships. Granted it was a different regime though.
The bottom line is SWA cost's and it's current business model don't support it. JBLU(190) parked them, Breeze(195) parked them. Spirit, Frontier and SWA don't have them for a reason. They don't work in that business model. If you begin to see more connections at SWA over the next few years and more importantly yields improve, then I think its something to be serious about. It took them ten years to figure out partnerships. Granted it was a different regime though.
Because those rates of pay have to be agreed to by the BOD, and thereafter the membership, SWA will not operate any aircraft other than a 737 with 175 or fewer seats unless those rates are viewed favorably by us.
So no, SWA won't make that deal in a heart beat because I can guarantee we won't be flying those aircraft for skywest rates. Thats like saying that if we get XLRs or widebodies is "altering scope" that SWA would jump on.
04-07-2026 | 12:13 PM
#117
At your mom's house
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,706
Likes: 472
From: cpt 737
SWA can currently fly any aircraft it wants under the SWAPA CBA. 1.M.1.a dictates that any aircraft other than a 737 will reopen the contract per 1.M.2.. That dictates the contract may be reopened to negotiate, among other things, rates of pay.
Because those rates of pay have to be agreed to by the BOD, and thereafter the membership, SWA will not operate any aircraft other than a 737 with 175 or fewer seats unless those rates are viewed favorably by us.
So no, SWA won't make that deal in a heart beat because I can guarantee we won't be flying those aircraft for skywest rates. Thats like saying that if we get XLRs or widebodies is "altering scope" that SWA would jump on.
Because those rates of pay have to be agreed to by the BOD, and thereafter the membership, SWA will not operate any aircraft other than a 737 with 175 or fewer seats unless those rates are viewed favorably by us.
So no, SWA won't make that deal in a heart beat because I can guarantee we won't be flying those aircraft for skywest rates. Thats like saying that if we get XLRs or widebodies is "altering scope" that SWA would jump on.
04-07-2026 | 12:37 PM
#118
Spikes the Koolaid
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 435
Likes: 16
From: 737
04-07-2026 | 12:48 PM
#119
Line Holder
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 977
Likes: 106
I totally get the golden-handcuffs issue, believe me. And I agree that a regional career is a risk, and not an insignificant one! Who would have thought that ExpressJet would be gone? Or Trans States? Or Comair? Or Atlantic Coast? These were not small companies. I'm not saying Skywest's days are numbered, but once the contractor airlines start paying their employees what they're worth, they get too expensive and the mainline carrier finds a cheaper date. It's one of many reasons they love outsourcing, and one of the many reasons I'll fight it at SWA as long as I'm here.
04-07-2026 | 12:51 PM
#120
Line Holder
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 977
Likes: 106
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
