DAL 88 Driver

Who sold the ticket and did just about everything they could to try and make it look to the customers like they were buying a ticket on the airline selling the ticket? In other words, who did the customer purchase the "product" from?

acl65pilot

CAL will have their share of lawsuits but the underwriter of colgan's insurance is what I am talking about. They are the ones that pay for that stuff.

gloopy

Management doesn't have the guts to do it first of all. Do you really think they would merge and inherit the longevity of a regional, plus the training costs, just to watch them slide over to top scale pay, just to spite the pilot group? That's a bluff I am willing to call all day long because it is an empty threat.

Not only that, but the "gold standard" these days is relative ratio based on category far, far more than it is DOH or simply list ratio. If someone brings top 10% senior RJ CA to the table before the "merger", they will be top 10% senior RJ CA after the merger. Nothing more. Management would hate a "regional windfall" as much as the pilot group would.

gloopy

Not only that, but as it is, there is no real job security even during the duration of an ASA/CPA/FFD contract because even mid contract, these groups are pressured with the never ending cycle of RFP's for new and existing flying. There is quite frequently mid CBA/ASA pressures to lower pilot costs "or else". Under the current system, even while in the middle of a great CBA with years left on the regional airline's ASA with the mainline airline, the threat of "deal us an ace now, or else as soon as this ASA ends we will lose a ton of flying" remains.

The current system provides built in negative pressure and instability for all but the most ultra senior on any given regional airline's seniority list, even in the short-medium term and regardless of CBA or ASA duration.

gloopy

All true, however, we are kidding ourselves if we think the "RJ" outsourcing issue is in the process of magically fixing itself. The 50 seaters are dropping off like flies, but the company is very, very much in love with the 70 and 76 seaters. Many of these planes are common type with existing 100-118 seater aircraft. Regionals that we outsource to operate that common type...while we do not. That is a massive threat to the profession and we would be wise to realize just how serious that threat is, both now and come C12K time. That is why, IMO, scope reversal to some degree needs to occur, because the existing scope is a drag chute on our profession the likes of which we have not nearly seen yet.

In addition to that, some regionals we outsource to already have inked firm orders for semi-next gen 100ish seaters and others already operate 100 seaters in different paint of the common types that we pay them to fly for us in the slightly smaller seat variants. That is also a massive threat under our existing unacceptable outsourcing handouts.

Yes, average gauge may be going up. There may be a resurgance of mainline flights to some cities that were previously dominated by RJ's. Great. But very, very soon our smallest plane will be a nominal amount of 130ish seaters and a ton of 150 seaters, and nothing else until we get to the outsourced 76 seaters, which are common types to what we allow to be outsourced up to almost 120 seats. The 50 seater issue is indeed solving itself, but the "RJ issue" is far, far from over. That battle will be fought well within this decade and our position had better be strong because we are being flanked big time, all the while being told to "watch the birdie" on hourly pay rates.

shiznit

I disagree with your "easy" premise:

For every "start-up RJ operator" there is a loss somewhere else in the network.

Gain Compass dues = Lose NWA mainline dues
Gain ASA/CMR dues= Lost DAL mainline dues
Gain CHQ CAL flying = Lost XJT dues
Gain GoJet pilots only= Lose UA mainline dues


Even if your theory was sort of true, it takes 2+ RJ pilots dues to replace 1 mainline pilots dues
(That is a lot more "walmarting" than can possibly have actually occured).....and I still aver that the flying is only shifting, not growing.

besides...what RJ airline has been started up in the last 10 years besides Gojets(diverted flying from transtates pilots...non-ALPA), Compass(that NWA created to replace DC-9 flying), and Freedom(which wasn't new growth but diverted Mesa growth...also non union but later absorbed into Mesa)?

Mesabah

Yes, but I have seen first hand the entitlement issues surrounding mergers. It won't be more than a few weeks till the mainline pilots start wanting RJ captain seats.

When Mesaba was bought by NWA we tried to file a PID to force a merger. ALPA balked saying it would end up like USair/AWA, and ALPA could not afford that happening.

gloopy

I have speculated about pre-scope reversal ASA extentions by managent as well. It is a possibility. But in doing so, management would give unintended pricing leverage to the pilot groups who'se ASA got extended. And don't forget that in all circumstances, mainlines have the predatory bargaining nuke. Outsourcing is already a B scale that mainline pilot groups have shopped to management for a cookie. Those same groups can always, always offer to do that flying for less if that becomes the only way to get it back in house, and there is nothing a regional could ever do about it.

As for union fairness and all that, why is it unfair for a mainline to get scope back, but not unfair for regionals to engage in predatory bargaining that plunder each other's existing flying? There is no moral leg to stand on at the regional level. Of course we're not talking about 01-01-2013 every single seat suddenly becomes insourced. I doubt that will even be an opener/teaser to begin with. No matter how it plays out, there will be regionals flying 50-70 seaters for most if not all mainlines for several decades. The issue is reversing the 76 seaters and limiting 70 seaters as contracts expire. That will result in decades of RFP bidding wars and the preservation of numerous seniority lists perpetually at war underbidding each other for flying.

capncrunch

That is dodging his point.

Mesabah

I just as anyone else here would absolutely love to see scope recaptured by the mainline. However, I also want to see it done effectively. Right now management is drawing down regional flying because it is less cost effective and it's a horrible product for customers. Why wold we want to take the hostile approach with this?

Furthermore, I don't trust anyone who doesn't have a dog in this fight. This would be the wide body captains, the ones most responsible for selling it in the past. What's to say the DPA won't sell scope further down the river, what's to say ALPA won't?