|
Originally Posted by Ottolillienthal
(Post 1297073)
It matters not who gets the blame. there is plenty to go around.
Blame it on the rain or milli vanilli if you like. Right now, the buck stops with us. Blame it on us if we goof this up. Won't matter who gets proved wrong when we don't move up the ladder due to RJ's taking over ALL domestic flying over the next 10 years at legacy carriers. As soon as they can send an RJ to London they'll go after the long haul stuff too. Every 10 years, this career goes backwards 30 years in terms of career expectations................ What you gonna do, barbeque, or mildew? If you are on the bottom one third of either the CAL or UAL seniority lists, this scope language should get your attention, because that's where you'll be for the next 10 years. Good Luck. This is genius . . . so what exactly are you complaining about? What line in the TA is upsetting you? What change do you expect in that line in the TA after a "No" vote? Oh wait that would require thought, time, and research and you don't have any of that, but you do have a lot of vitriol. Oh sorry vitriol is that too big of a word? |
Originally Posted by untied
(Post 1297004)
Our pay rates actually surpass DAL's by year 3.
Work rules were tough since CAL's were so bad to begin with. We are actually fighting a war on several fronts...one being with management and another with CAL ALPA and their illustrious leader. I guess I just don't understand why we have to beg for the privilege of flying our own passengers. When I refer to "DC-9" size airplanes, that's right on the mark. Look at the gross weights of early DC-9's. And how much can a reserve be flown at UAL? I know CAL can go to FAR max. I thought I heard UAL was around 95 for narrowbody and 92 widebody. That's really not much better then CAL. 76 seat aircraft have been around...what....7 years or so? When was the last time UAL/CAL flew DC9-10's or an equivalent? They've been gone a while. I don't see any regionals flying around for DAL with 100 seats in them. Only 76 seats. I do see them flying around for Us Air with 86 seats though. Darn facts getting in your way again. |
Originally Posted by johnso29
(Post 1297104)
It takes until year 3 to pass DAL? Looks like you're not even getting industry standard WRT pay rates then.
And how much can a reserve be flown at UAL? I know CAL can go to FAR max. I thought I heard UAL was around 95 for narrowbody and 92 widebody. That's really not much better then CAL. 76 seat aircraft have been around...what....7 years or so? When was the last time UAL/CAL flew DC9-10's or an equivalent? They've been gone a while. I don't see any regionals flying around for DAL with 100 seats in them. Only 76 seats. I do see them flying around for Us Air with 86 seats though. Darn facts getting in your way again. Get your facts straight before calling them facts, Regionals were flying CRJ900s, but will not be flying them much longer. 95 hours at UAL, NOT. DC-9 size aircraft. Oh yeah there's the 737-500 and A319 oops not that fact either. Gimmee a break. |
going on 6 pages......wonder how the looming pilot shortage figures in to all this.....
|
Originally Posted by Ottolillienthal
(Post 1297066)
BEWARE: Rj's at 76 seats. However..........word is management is buying the 90ish seat version, and removing some seats.
wanna bet they will come to us, either voluntarilly or behind some veil and start their own plan for 90 something seat RJ flying.... 90 seats for 900 miles. DUDE////////// It was never about the 76 seat RJ............It'a always been about the 90 class seat jet. Beware If we let them buy the big RJ's they will eventually reconfigure them and take 90 pax up to 900 miles. The language is not tight enough. Too much risk for main line pilots. Wow....you have no idea what you are talking about. Do yourself a big favor and attend a roadshow. |
Originally Posted by nwa757
(Post 1296465)
Why don't mainline pilots fly them for regional wages? What's wrong with that?
Any swap/drop/trade of RJs that results in more new RJs being bought it a crock and we all know it. Even if 50 seaters are parked, no more 76 seaters should be bought unless they are flown by mainline. Whats your angle? I assume you were on the property for the large four engine avro's that hit the property, then the crj 900's and EMB175 pre DAL merger. I agree with you these ac should be flown at mainline but some of your posts seem to forget being part of where this started.:confused: |
Originally Posted by johnso29
(Post 1297104)
It takes until year 3 to pass DAL? Looks like you're not even getting industry standard WRT pay rates then.
And how much can a reserve be flown at UAL? I know CAL can go to FAR max. I thought I heard UAL was around 95 for narrowbody and 92 widebody. That's really not much better then CAL. 76 seat aircraft have been around...what....7 years or so? When was the last time UAL/CAL flew DC9-10's or an equivalent? They've been gone a while. I don't see any regionals flying around for DAL with 100 seats in them. Only 76 seats. I do see them flying around for Us Air with 86 seats though. Darn facts getting in your way again. You are wrong again WRT reserve flying. 89 hours max for wide body. Not sure about NB anymore. We flew the 737-500 a few years ago with about 100 seats in it, so giving express 90 seaters (with 76 temporarily installed) is pretty comparable. Didn't NWA fly some "baby 9's" very recently?? Management demands more scope concessions with every new contract. They either want MORE RJ's, or BIGGER RJ's. They ALWAYS get what they want, and ALPA usually claims victory for every scope concession. Next time around they will want to put 90 seats in the CRJ-900's and we'll be told "come on guys...they already have the airplanes. We're not really giving up anything and there offering a 3% raise!!! |
Originally Posted by untied
(Post 1297291)
Never said I was happy with the pay, but we match DAL's pay in December. Neither contract touches SWA rates for "industry leading".
You are wrong again WRT reserve flying. 89 hours max for wide body. Not sure about NB anymore. We flew the 737-500 a few years ago with about 100 seats in it, so giving express 90 seaters (with 76 temporarily installed) is pretty comparable. Didn't NWA fly some "baby 9's" very recently?? Management demands more scope concessions with every new contract. They either want MORE RJ's, or BIGGER RJ's. They ALWAYS get what they want, and ALPA usually claims victory for every scope concession. Next time around they will want to put 90 seats in the CRJ-900's and we'll be told "come on guys...they already have the airplanes. We're not really giving up anything and there offering a 3% raise!!! The last NW baby 9 was parked in early 2006. So far DL hasnt even ordered a single additional jumbo RJ. |
Originally Posted by Trip7
(Post 1297277)
Wow....you have no idea what you are talking about. Do yourself a big favor and attend a roadshow.
As a 5 year FO at ASA on the 200 with no discernible upgrade in sight please tell me why if you are so economically savvy and have all the answers towards airline protifabitlity and economics, why do you continue to do laps in the loser cruiser for 40k a year when you could get such a better job with your self appointed MBA |
Originally Posted by Gunga Galunga
(Post 1297340)
Trip your arrogance and constant flame towards UAL pilots in their fight against scope or anyone who disagrees with you for that matter is an embarrassment to ASA. A quick search of the Internet shows SAS flies 900s and LOT flies 175s. Airplanes that should and can be flown for live able wages.
As a 5 year FO at ASA on the 200 with no discernible upgrade in sight please tell me why if you are so economically savvy and have all the answers towards airline protifabitlity and economics, why do you continue to do laps in the loser cruiser for 40k a year when you could get such a better job with your self appointed MBA That the RJ FO (trip7) even feels that he's the one to lecture UAL and L-CAL pilots on scope after the last 10 plus years is laughable in itself. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:38 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands