BoilerUP

I don't "blame" mainline pilots, just as I don't "blame" regional pilots. The situation airline pilots find themselves in today is due to a multitude of factors and all airline pilots, regardless of the size of airplane they fly or name on their paystub bears a little responsibility for the situation. With that said, one can't honestly say regional pilots "took" jobs from mainline pilots when mainline pilots themselves gave that flying away. It might have been given away under duress of concessionary negotiations, but it was given away nonetheless, surrendered in place of additional pay/work rules/retirement degradation.

Despite your, mine, and everyone elses' desires those jobs which have been outsourced will NEVER be back at mainline; the price in negotiating capital required to recapture that scope will be higher than mainline pilots are willing to pay; look no further than the current Delta/Compass integration discussion to see how pilots sometimes can't see the f'in forest for the trees.

While it might have been under threat and some even come during bankruptcy proceedings, that doesn't change the simple fact that concessionary changes in scope were approved by MEMRAT.

You can blame regional pilots, you can blame management, you can blame bankruptcy, you can blame the Bush Administration, the RLA, the NLRB, and the Easter Bunny for the current situation...it doesn't change what happened in 1991 with DALPA letting Comair fly the CRJ-100 and it doesn't change a majority of line pilots conceding scope instead of their other options.

Losing your pay, your workrules, your retirement...those things are tangable, measurable and immediate; losing scope is fairly ambiguous and not immediately or even easily noticeable. Well, at least until narrowbodies start being parked while a regional airline is filling that gaps with Jungle Busses or DCRJ-9s.

Again, forest for the trees...

Excel

I blame the easter bunny. With the way things are headed we can all plan on making a career at the regionals, or leave aviation all together. Thanks for nothing rabbit.

Bond

First, I'm not a mainline pilot. I'm a regional pilot. Second, you seem to be turning the argument to justify the means. Here's how I see it, yes the majors gave up scope, and they paid a price, but that's in the past. You're ability to negotiate industry leading rates or better for the 190's is now!!!!

No matter how you try to spin it the 190 is a mainline size aircraft, for which the majors have not given up scope, nor will they, I think everyone at the majors learned their lessons after the last round (see United, USair, Delta, etc.). However in the unlikely event that your regional (or any other for that matter) should get the birds to fly under their own flag, you owe it to yourself and to your brothers across the board, heck you owe it to your future, to negotiate industry leading or better.

No hypocrisy or egos here, just honest facts, perhaps, you didn't like the sound of the truth.

sargeanb

E175s is as big as we're going to get...these 190 rumors are getting old...and I do hope that they stay just that: rumors.

ToiletDuck

Further...

ToiletDuck

Pot meet Kettle

Bond

You know; you lost your credibility about 3 pages ago when you couldn't answer a simple yes or no question.

We know you will fly the 190's for a "fair" wage, but will you fly them for sub-standard wages? Cause you know, "fair" is open to interpretation, sub-standard is not.

So here's your chance again,

Will you blindly follow your ceo and fly the 190 for *sub-standard wages?

Or will you get behind the rest of your pilot group, and the industry, and push for leading industry wages?

*In case I need to define sub-standard for you, just as I had to explain date of sign on contract negotiations; sub-standard means below the current standard, for example less money than Jetblue by way of comparison across the board.

ToiletDuck

I've answered it as cut and dry as possible... twice. I will vote no for anything that is sub-standard. Read man. I've gone into vast elaboration how I would vote against anything of the sort multiple times with you. No, nadda, Aye, Ie, Na La, Ankobi, Geen, Nee, Haw, Tsaa C'am, Win, Ba, Aqa, Janiwa, Yox, Enna, Ayi,Ah ah, Gila, Ne, Poi-e, Hm, Awije, All-,Gala, Be, Ma'anic, Xa'ni, Hani, Ma, La, Ko, Nani, Kamu, Kepu, Su, Ne, Wata, yaga, A'ou, hani, aliu, umaaw, noon, yagu, Nese, nah, Gdu, Aa,.... or in the most simplest form I can think of... NO I will not support it by any means which I've stated a few times. Read what someone writes before responding to it already. Each time you've asked with this specific question I've answered with a very specific and easy to understand "NO". For crying out loud man NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO. I'll check back in tomorrow for your next "You still haven't answered my question yet" post.

ToiletDuck

You have no earthly idea at all what will happen in the future. Your opinion isn't fact. No matter what argument can be made you still can't see the future. There's been several times I've heard how something will NEVER happen here then next you know there it is.

Rightseat Ballast

Wow. 18 pages of arguing over something that is hypothetical at best. Let's set some facts straight:

1) RAH may already have a "190" payscale. Our current contract bases pay on number of seats installed. So long as any 190's that show up on property have 99 seats or less, there is no negotiation necessary. US Airways has their 190's configured for 99 seats (not saying they are coming our way, just an example).

2) Us line pilots at RAH do not know what is going on in the contract negotiations process. We do not know if the new pay section will still have our pay based on seats, or on weight, on type, or any other criteria.

3) All non-RAH pilots do not know what is going on in our contract negotiations, and do not know if our new pay section will be based on seats, weight, or type, etc.

4) No mainline carrier has relaxed scope to allow RAH to fly 190's.

5) Most every airline that could relax scope will not do so as long as they have furloughed pilots on the street, or if the threat of further furloughs still exists. NO ONE is releasing scope in the near future.

6) RAH management will decide if we pilots will fly the 190, not the other way around.

7) In this poor economy and horrible business climate, no RAH pilot is going to refuse to fly a legitimately acquired aircraft just because it is "bigger". We won't cross picket lines or fly struck work, but we won't lose our jobs over someone else's arbitrary decision on what is a mainline aircraft and what is a regional aircraft

There are so many factors lined up against RAH getting 190's. IF IF IF RAH gets 190's in the near future, they are going to be in a market that DOES NOT COMPETE with our mainline partners, who foot the bill for our company's existence. 190's for Mokulele? Maybe, but that will be all of 3 or 4 aircraft at most, and flown at full risk to RAH. 190's in a vacation/charter capacity? Possible...and in that case, the pay rates for charter aircraft do not necessarily follow those of airlines.

Many of the major airlines today were not part of the original class of long range and international haulers. US Airways was made of regional airlines. They evolved into flying A330's on transatlantic routes. Delta was flying Martin 404's around the southeast. Now look at their fleet and route structure. Airlines evolve. At some point, an occasional small airline grows into something bigger. Look at SWA. I don't know if RAH is that airline, but at some point one of these regionals WILL grow into a a competitor for you mainline carriers. Part of that evolution is acquiring larger aircraft, and sometimes, that just can't be stopped.