Originally Posted by LeineLodge

Actually, taken word for word 80's quote above is correct. The TA does further lock in mainline flying:

1. The total number of RJ's is reduced from 450 to 425.
2. The mainline to DCI block hour ratio is increased from a maximum min (if that even makes sense ) of 1.56 to 1.81. Prior to the JPWA the ratio was somewhere around 0.9.

I'm not saying it's right, and I would rather not see 25 more 76 seaters, but these are 2 improvements over the current PWA. Do they offset having more 76 seaters? We only have to decide if the MEC sends it to memrat tomorrow afternoon. We will see soon enough.

As for the carrot and stick routine with the 190's, I am in complete agreement. We should not consider that in our decision on this deal at all. They can buy them or not, and our blessing is not required either way. The only thing the TA does wrt the 190's IMO is get the rates for them up to where they ought to be. If they come under the current rates my prediction is you will see street captains (or nearly so) because nobody currently on the property would bid it.

Originally Posted by JungleBus

I flew the E175 for 6.5 years, 6 of those as a CA. It's actually a very comfortable cockpit, and a nice-flying, well-designed, reliable airplane. I fly the MadDog now and it's slightly more cramped, far less comfortable temps, far less reliable, tries to kill or violate me with some regularity, and makes me work about 3x as hard as I ever did in the Ejet. I'll gladly, gladly take my Delta upgrade in the E195. It's ok that you and many others don't want to do narrowbody flying, that will allow those of us who are junior much better seniority in the left seat. Choices are a good thing.

That said, I'm still not willing to let management outsource one more mainline-replacement RJ to get 195s.

Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp

That's why I said despite 25 more jumbo RJs. I don't disagree. The block hour ratios get to where I thought they should be in C2012, plus the closing of the republic loophole and other areas were good.

I was trying to be fair and give credit where it was due as far as a more positive aspect.

Remember that they haven't even exercised all the options on the 76 seaters that they can currently do in this case. With all the mud in this mediocre at best contract, I considered that one of the lower threat items as far as gives. That's all that I was saying.

Originally Posted by JungleBus

That said, I'm still not willing to let management outsource one more mainline-replacement RJ to get 195s.

Originally Posted by Airbusdude14

I don't want to lose the focus of what we're talking about here I do believe that more improvements could be made to this TA. As for what I did before Delta I was a ferry pilot and worked for a regional airline. I have flown more than 20 different types and makes of aircraft including the E170 thru 195, Crj 200, 700 and 900, DC 9, 727, 57,67, Air Bus family and have been on some proving flights of the C series. Like I said don't want to lose our focus of the TA. You asked what I did and I am just telling you. I know how it feels to spend hours on end in a smaller plane. I just don't like that the company puts a new category out to try to pass this TA. It's the same as when they asked for consesionIt's the same as when they asked for concessions if you give us this will give you that. Don't fall for the bait.

Originally Posted by WidgetDriver

Why give 25 more large RJs up however? I suspect the 50 seaters go either way. They aren't economical anymore.

Originally Posted by Hank Kingsley

Several area code seniority pilots are voicing "hell no" on this forum. I'm one.

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

I'm still undecided.

Carl