Mem9guy

I think that this is one of the most rational statements that I have seen on this thread in a long time. We will be stronger as a 12000 member pilot group than we are as a 7000+5000 member group.

Dash8widget

In this case, it isn't just the pilots who see RJET as a single carrier - it's the NMB as well.

georgetg

Apart from our Section 1 discussion, it seems odd the company would financially support a competitor.
Look at the RAH annual report, the F9/branded operation is loosing money while the CPA side of the house is making money. And DAL isn't the only carrier supporting Republic -- UAL, AA and LCC all have a CPA with RAH.

F9 via RAH is being used as a surrogate to keep pressure on UAL and SWA in DEN.

That's the only plausible reason DAL would continue supporting RAH via DCI feed whlie they are growing as a competitor.

YMMV

Cheers
George

Wasatch Phantom

Satch,

Could it be that the market itself is wrong?

Think about this the next time you're standing in the cockpit doorway saying "good bye" to a plane full of passengers:

Imagine you had screwed up royally and crashed the airplane. In addition to destroyed an asset worth tens of millions of dollars, you killed 100+ of the folks you just said good bye to. Every one of those passengers have brothers/sisters/ sons/daughters/mothers/fathers etc.

That is one heck of a lot of responsibility.

We as a profession are grossly under-compensated. Think about it...

Luftwaffe

Nothing has really changed insofar Chautauqua and Shuttle America will continue to feed our airline as they do for now. The pilots who fly for RAH can now negotiate a contract under one pilot group rather than be whipsawed by management to the lowest common denominator. Perhaps and we can hope, their costs rise, they become less attractive to feed our airline, we replace more of their feed with MD-90's, and eventually they no longer carry our code.

newKnow

Satch,

Just a few questions to start. How is it that you know that you are fairly compensated for today's market conditions? Are today's airlines less profitable than they were in the past?

I also think you should be careful when you base your fairness evaluation on a comparison to what other 737 FO's make in the industry. What if we still had a B scale and your $105 per hour was actually $50 per hour? Would you be fairly compensated then?

What's important to realize is that your current compensation is largely based on what Delta Air Lines and DALPA decided your compensation should be. We agreed to it too, when we voted for it.

While I'm sure the words "market conditions" were used when the negotiations took place, I'm equally as sure the word "forecast" preceded them, which basically means they used educated guess. Your pay is not based on current market conditions because it's not like customers start paying extra for tickets and you get a raise. Also, the forecast is never really any good. I could do better in Vegas at the roulette table.

Unfortunately, in airline labor negotiations, all too often the agreed upon educated guess at what the future market conditions will be has come in low and while the airlines subsequently made record profits, the employees we're left with comparisons to justify why they didn't get their proportionate share of the pie.

"At least I make more than American pilots," and "I'm doing pretty good compared to Southwest pilots," should be tempered, because I feel there is a good chance all of us have been bamboozled.

It's close to pick up time for me though, so I couldn't research this "feeling" because I'm out of time. I think the question I would like to see answered the most (by anyone) is what do today's market conditions for airline profitability look like when compared to the past?

That ought to start an interesting conversation.

trlaketige

They will be there until we, as a pilot group, stand up and shout NO!

acl65pilot

Call BS all you want. Emotionally I am with you. I see no reason to support an airline that has a pilot group that is not represented by ALPA. (BTW I hope we can bring them in to ALPA as they are the biggest risk to an end-round to our Section one via feed to other skyteam partners.) I do not like what many of the RJET pilot say when I talk to them. Most are tickled pink to fly a 190 for 116 or less and hr and hope we keep selling scope. It is a group that does not see the forest from the trees.

All of that said, until this ruling cause an operational or structural change to the business entity known as RJET. Until these pilots can bid across certificates without going though a initial indoc. Until the certificates are managed on a day to day basis by the holding company, little has changed except that the pilot group is seen as one. It does not change the mechanics of it.

I will be the first to agree that it is BS, but BS or not it is legal under what we define as an air carrier. Until it can be proven that these certificate management teams are not managing their own certificate and BB is doing it from the holding company, there is little leverage. I do know that our Code Share compliance committee has looked and will continue to look at Republic very closely. The reps are very aware of the "heartburn" the pilot group has over this, and will not give them anymore leeway than they already have.

All of that said, we as pilots must watch and be vigilant in reporting anything we see on this. Facts and proof will be needed.

Exactly, but it can and we are watching. This latest agreement was for six years. If that does not tell this group anything we need to pay more attention. DAL is actively layering these agreements. I do not believe DAL is planing on shrinking in the next five or so years, so let look at what else may be coming to market.

I know if I were a regional pilot that wanted to make a place like Republic my home, I would be very concerned by the actions and duration of these new agreements. I then would change my career strategy.


Unless we willfully sell the farm, the landscape of the airlines will change yet again, in the next ten years. All of it will be because of a steadfast commitment not to sell scope, and the economics that will make the DCI gauge segment of the market so unprofitable, no one will want to continue to operate these jets. (This is of course until they hang a GTF off of a E-Jet.)

A sunset clause solves all of these issues.

satchip

In a way you are right about intrinsic value. A pilot's intrinsic value to a particular plane load of passengers on a particular day is the same as it was 40 years ago. So in a micro economic sense, yes. But in a macro economic sense of the entire airline pilot market place it's undeniable that a pilots value has declined since the salad days of aviation. If it weren't there would be higher wages across the board.

It's mostly a function of supply and demand. Mostly on the supply side due to lowered barriers to entry, which we don't control. Deregulation caused price pressures on labor witch were partially solved by outsourcing to lower wage pilots with lower qualifications. Would a 200 hour flight academy graduate have been flying around passengers in 1964?

Whose fault is it? Certainly not the regional pilots for taking jobs. Thinking that someone should not take a regional job at a lower wage than a mainline guy because he should somehow sacrifice himself to "save the profession" is asinine. It's akin to Berkowitz saying "please stop me before I kill again!"

Its partly the fault of senior major airline pilots who lacked the forward vision to see that deregulation had irrevocably altered the marketplace and allowed small jet flying to be outsourced. Once that line was crossed it's very hard to go back.

Mostly it's the fault of the government. They deregulated the market to achieve more consumer choice and lower fares due to competition. Mission accomplished on that front. Then they didn't allow the players to rationalize the new marketplace. Whenever the most capable of the established players made moves to consolidate their market share and survive profitably, the government allowed new players to enter at ridiculously low costs. When established players faltered that happened to serve markets frequented by government elites, they bailed them out, a la USAIR.

What's the solution? The 1500 hour requirement is a start. Attaching subcontractor liability to the parent carrier would probably do more to bring back flying in house than a whole snake farm of Cobras.

What I am trying to say is that we need representation that understands the current and future market, not historical ones. To demand a return to a bygone era because of a sense of entitlement is counter productive to say the least. Look ahead, clocks and calendars don't run backwards.

acl65pilot

Look at the going rate for a BBJ Captain and FO, then compare to ours.

Look at a SWA FO rate and then those rates. Then look at productivity and provide an hourly rate for those BBJ guys and compare it to your rate. That will give you a good indication of what market forces pay compared to us.

It has been a few years since I have done this, but I can tell you that our hourly rate is a lot lower than the BBJ's/Global Express pilots are. If you are really board, look at what Coke pays their pilots. They are one of the few companies that has high utilization of their pilots.