This is where my thinking is. Max Gross is not what defines an rj. These days range doesn't even really do it since a 175 can cross from sea to shining sea. It's seats. If they can avoid it, the big three will never fly a 76 seat jet in house, and the gross weight basically just equates to fuel weight. It's not even a concession if the gross weight is changed to allow the mrj if any modifications to the weight limitations specifically address the seats or even specifically address the type and seats so they can't come back later and say well now we have a 100 seat rj and its only 90000lbs at mtow so it's fine too.

I think with enough control language and a sweetener like was given before when the 76 seater were new that further limits the total number of rjs in operation or limits the ratio of rjs to mainline jets and we aren't even talking about concessions, we're talking about gains. A greater amount of definition and restriction to scope overall. The pilots at the majors win because they are getting more control over how much of what gets outsourced, and reducing the amount of flying that is outsourced over all and the airlines win because they get their fancy new fuel efficient rjs and can ditch more 50 seaters.

We also need to remember fuel efficiency is a big economic force for our codeshare partners, because they buy our fuel.

To the mainline group, if they are going to take a concession in their contract, there will have to be significant gains in other job protection language. Mainline management has created a nightmare in the RJs and mainline pilots will be all too happy to see them bring that flying, not airplanes back to mainline. Like I said, I would be shocked if any pilot group caved on scope. The MRJ 70 fits nicely into scope. The 175 does as well. There is no reason to take concessions on MGTOW.

I see that everyone talks about scope as if it is bulletproof. In fact no contract is. It may only take a simple redefine of some language and done. I have seen airlines do this in the past. Sometimes successful sometimes not. Point being is that we all asume that scope will be some huge barrier to the airline mgmnt. I suspect they have already consulted their expensive legal counsel and have an ace card in their back pocket. Remember, we are in a part of history where many firsts have occured. We cannot believe that the future will function the same way as the past.

And my glass half empty thought is this: dangle a big juicy carrot over mainline pilots and I really believe they will take it. Why? Because people are greedy and will only think of their own imediate gains. Sure a few will say no, but I believe the majority will be yes voters. I want to be wrong, but I really think this is how it will play out.

There's a Facebook ad for TSA saying "You may NEVER sit reserve as a First Officer." How true is that?

How big have the last couple classes been?

Saw two classes at the training center when I did recurrent a few days ago...looked like 7 or 8 in each. No idea how many are in sims or waiting on IOE

Haha not very! It really depends on the base. Ralliegh, mabe no reserve. STL I would guess reserve. If somebody were to ever get Denver, than definatly reserve... for a lonnng time.

Basically I think the the whole no reserve thing is total BS. After all this is the same scheduling dept that would rather cancel a flight than use their reserves (it happens).

Reserve may be short though. Just depends on how many FOs we can attract.

I can't understand why we are not taking advantage of Denver. Most new hire's primary goal is to live in base. We are even doing a "reserve your seniority" program which helps with that. We are hurting so bad for new hires it is crazy to think that we are turning away people that would be interested because they can't hold the base they want.

I think we should open the standing bid and let everyone go to the base they want. Scheduling can then build lines off that. It may reduce efficiency and create more deadheads but in the end it will help bring people in the door! Republic was doing this a few months ago so it is a possibility.

haha... you serious?

I'll translate: It may reduce everyone to min days off, cost the company an inordinate amount of money and lead to crippling cancellations...but at least I get to go to Denver.