Umm...we are all pilots. We always find something to complain about...

I am/was complaining about the 175. How many of those are not going to mainline because we gave up that scope? The 50/70 seaters killed themselves and were going away anyway. We just gave relief to the company and Skywest etc... By giving away larger aircraft (the 175). I do hope we see the 190's or larger.

When it's finally apparent the regionals can't hire enough pilots to fly the schedule contracted for, we have a chance to fly them at mainline.

As a pilot that spent a decade at the Regional level, I believe that scope it the most important issue with regards to a CBA. I think that it's more important get the flying to mainline and then we can eventually get the pay rates. I think that it's a bit myopic to pass up on the flying because the current pay rates are low. We need to begin to take our flying back and get the jobs at mainline!!!

Pilot payrates aren't the problem. Its putting the airplane under United's cost structure. Not just pilots, but Flight Atttendants, Rampers, Maintenance, etc. To get that flying we would have to make significant cuts across our CBA to subsidize doing that flying.

Man, how did our negotiators get the 190 rates so wrong? As a junior guy, it upsets me. It would really stink to get displaced to that pay rate and take a $40/hr pay cut.

I agree that pilot rates aren't the problem but strongly disagree that pilots would ever have the need to subsidize. Airlines took advantage of pilot agreements and farmed the flying to the lowest unit cost.

When the feed is too expensive, unreliable, uncompetitive or which other metric is important at the time, the flying comes back. Combined with restrictive scope language, the company can serve marginal markets but it's up to the pilot group to keep/strengthen restrictive language that makes the economic formula favor mainline pilots on a given route.

I completely agree! I understand the costs associated. All I was trying to say is that if UAL is going to convert the flying to mainline, we shouldn't balk at it solely because of how low the current pay rates are.

Which is part of the problem. We have guys that say "Get that flying now and we will deal with payrates etc later" and then we have guys complaining that the E-190 pay rates are too low and how we screwed that up.

So which is it? We aren't going to have it both ways. I see the problem being that we are still below C2000 payrates, and this does not even take into account inflation. Fix that first, then deal with E-175 being on the property.

United is paying for and owns the new E175s going to express