The Scope Discussion Thread
09-19-2017, 07:16 PM
#11
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Feb 2015
Position: 777FO
Posts: 771
But ask yourself this;
What's the BIGGER threat to the mainline NB pilot's job? The crappy 50 seater serving East Jesus Texas and BFE Louisiana, or wherever else? OR, the 70 seater that's more capacity disciplined/flexible for medium/large cities when mainline feels the need to scale back NB service?
What's the BIGGER threat to the mainline NB pilot's job? The crappy 50 seater serving East Jesus Texas and BFE Louisiana, or wherever else? OR, the 70 seater that's more capacity disciplined/flexible for medium/large cities when mainline feels the need to scale back NB service?
09-19-2017, 08:55 PM
#12
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: 777, sofa
Posts: 1,183
I think most guys who flew RJs for too long are committed to not letting any scope go. No matter what carrot is offered.
On the other side of things when we are talking about reclaiming scope, I can't stress enough how important that is to me. Had I been hired at United to fly a RJ, instead of at a subcontractor, I'd be sitting on over a dozen years of seniority, instead of two. If my relative seniority was unchanged, if my pay at mainline flying RJs was the same as it was at a subcontractor flying RJs, if I finally got to the Guppy at the same time, I'd have been at the top of the pay scale, instead of at the bottom, which right now is about a $300,000 difference over a career.
On top of that pay difference, I'd have an extra decade of 401k match. I'd have enjoyed better medical coverage, at a lower premium. I'd have been enjoying an annual month of vacation, instead of the two weeks I've been at forever.
Management can schedule any kind of airplane on any route they want. Really. 50 seaters kind of suck to ride in, but they fly ok. My bottom line: if it says United on the ticket, the people at the controls need to be United pilots. Pay should be as high as the Union can secure. But even if it isnominally less than what express pays, it is 100% worth it to the new hire who has to sit in the seat at that rate for a decade.
On the other side of things when we are talking about reclaiming scope, I can't stress enough how important that is to me. Had I been hired at United to fly a RJ, instead of at a subcontractor, I'd be sitting on over a dozen years of seniority, instead of two. If my relative seniority was unchanged, if my pay at mainline flying RJs was the same as it was at a subcontractor flying RJs, if I finally got to the Guppy at the same time, I'd have been at the top of the pay scale, instead of at the bottom, which right now is about a $300,000 difference over a career.
On top of that pay difference, I'd have an extra decade of 401k match. I'd have enjoyed better medical coverage, at a lower premium. I'd have been enjoying an annual month of vacation, instead of the two weeks I've been at forever.
Management can schedule any kind of airplane on any route they want. Really. 50 seaters kind of suck to ride in, but they fly ok. My bottom line: if it says United on the ticket, the people at the controls need to be United pilots. Pay should be as high as the Union can secure. But even if it isnominally less than what express pays, it is 100% worth it to the new hire who has to sit in the seat at that rate for a decade.
09-19-2017, 10:20 PM
#13
Squawking 2000
Joined APC: Jul 2015
Position: Skeptical
Posts: 737
I think most guys who flew RJs for too long are committed to not letting any scope go. No matter what carrot is offered.
On the other side of things when we are talking about reclaiming scope, I can't stress enough how important that is to me. Had I been hired at United to fly a RJ, instead of at a subcontractor, I'd be sitting on over a dozen years of seniority, instead of two. If my relative seniority was unchanged, if my pay at mainline flying RJs was the same as it was at a subcontractor flying RJs, if I finally got to the Guppy at the same time, I'd have been at the top of the pay scale, instead of at the bottom, which right now is about a $300,000 difference over a career.
On top of that pay difference, I'd have an extra decade of 401k match. I'd have enjoyed better medical coverage, at a lower premium. I'd have been enjoying an annual month of vacation, instead of the two weeks I've been at forever.
Management can schedule any kind of airplane on any route they want. Really. 50 seaters kind of suck to ride in, but they fly ok. My bottom line: if it says United on the ticket, the people at the controls need to be United pilots. Pay should be as high as the Union can secure. But even if it isnominally less than what express pays, it is 100% worth it to the new hire who has to sit in the seat at that rate for a decade.
On the other side of things when we are talking about reclaiming scope, I can't stress enough how important that is to me. Had I been hired at United to fly a RJ, instead of at a subcontractor, I'd be sitting on over a dozen years of seniority, instead of two. If my relative seniority was unchanged, if my pay at mainline flying RJs was the same as it was at a subcontractor flying RJs, if I finally got to the Guppy at the same time, I'd have been at the top of the pay scale, instead of at the bottom, which right now is about a $300,000 difference over a career.
On top of that pay difference, I'd have an extra decade of 401k match. I'd have enjoyed better medical coverage, at a lower premium. I'd have been enjoying an annual month of vacation, instead of the two weeks I've been at forever.
Management can schedule any kind of airplane on any route they want. Really. 50 seaters kind of suck to ride in, but they fly ok. My bottom line: if it says United on the ticket, the people at the controls need to be United pilots. Pay should be as high as the Union can secure. But even if it isnominally less than what express pays, it is 100% worth it to the new hire who has to sit in the seat at that rate for a decade.
Those of us who languished at the regionals for a decade plus know the value of scope because the wrecking ball of C-scale regional wages swung through our families that entire time. We know how lucky we are to have made it through, and we know how close that precipice is behind us.
You don't have to worry about ANY regional guys voting to give up scope. The sentiment here is strong and unified: "NO EFFING WAY." Period. End of story.
The only conversation former regional guys want our Negotiating Commitee to take part in regarding scope is to INCREASE restrictions on outsourcing. I'll fight that battle until my last day.
09-20-2017, 05:17 AM
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2014
Posts: 805
Ultimately they need to fill whatever airplane they put on a route to make it profitable. If you can fill a 76 seat airplane you can fill a 118 seat airplane with proper marketing and reliable service. Especially when you consider the fleet commonality and the cost to operate another 737 vs a new fleet type. LCCs are starting routes with 160+ seat jets and yet we are determined to use crappy, delayed, and incompetent regionals to build new markets. We don't need a new fleet type that will do nothing but complicate our operation. Let the 737's and Airbus's do the lifting.
There is zero reason to give on scope. Not on weight and not on passengers. The 175, in my eyes, isn't a regional aircraft. We have 3d printing and an increased use of composite materials coming that will lower the weights of these jets.
There is zero reason to give on scope. Not on weight and not on passengers. The 175, in my eyes, isn't a regional aircraft. We have 3d printing and an increased use of composite materials coming that will lower the weights of these jets.
09-20-2017, 05:49 AM
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: SFO Guppy CA
Posts: 1,112
Regional scope is very important, but JV scope may actually be even more important. Delta has the best wide body fleet, but they don't fly most of them. Wide body positions are obviously the best paying positions.
09-20-2017, 06:27 AM
#16
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2009
Posts: 788
I think most guys who flew RJs for too long are committed to not letting any scope go. No matter what carrot is offered.
On the other side of things when we are talking about reclaiming scope, I can't stress enough how important that is to me. Had I been hired at United to fly a RJ, instead of at a subcontractor, I'd be sitting on over a dozen years of seniority, instead of two. If my relative seniority was unchanged, if my pay at mainline flying RJs was the same as it was at a subcontractor flying RJs, if I finally got to the Guppy at the same time, I'd have been at the top of the pay scale, instead of at the bottom, which right now is about a $300,000 difference over a career.
On top of that pay difference, I'd have an extra decade of 401k match. I'd have enjoyed better medical coverage, at a lower premium. I'd have been enjoying an annual month of vacation, instead of the two weeks I've been at forever.
Management can schedule any kind of airplane on any route they want. Really. 50 seaters kind of suck to ride in, but they fly ok. My bottom line: if it says United on the ticket, the people at the controls need to be United pilots. Pay should be as high as the Union can secure. But even if it isnominally less than what express pays, it is 100% worth it to the new hire who has to sit in the seat at that rate for a decade.
On the other side of things when we are talking about reclaiming scope, I can't stress enough how important that is to me. Had I been hired at United to fly a RJ, instead of at a subcontractor, I'd be sitting on over a dozen years of seniority, instead of two. If my relative seniority was unchanged, if my pay at mainline flying RJs was the same as it was at a subcontractor flying RJs, if I finally got to the Guppy at the same time, I'd have been at the top of the pay scale, instead of at the bottom, which right now is about a $300,000 difference over a career.
On top of that pay difference, I'd have an extra decade of 401k match. I'd have enjoyed better medical coverage, at a lower premium. I'd have been enjoying an annual month of vacation, instead of the two weeks I've been at forever.
Management can schedule any kind of airplane on any route they want. Really. 50 seaters kind of suck to ride in, but they fly ok. My bottom line: if it says United on the ticket, the people at the controls need to be United pilots. Pay should be as high as the Union can secure. But even if it isnominally less than what express pays, it is 100% worth it to the new hire who has to sit in the seat at that rate for a decade.
All the maint of the RJ would be done by mainline...the flight attds mainline. Etc.
Mngmt will work hard to keep a smaller airplane off the certificate for these and other reasons. It may prove to be a futile effort as pilot supply dwindles.
Personal opinion( like noses, everyone has one): If the regionals can't crew their fleets, the legacies will let cities that can't support a larger aircraft go, or find some way to string a series of cities together between hubs, as the regionals such as North Central, Ozark etc used to do.
I do not expect to see the legacies fly anything under 100 seats, and am personally skeptical that Delta's 100 seat experiment will work out when fuel prices go up and the collapse of the more rural economies accelerates.
Also expect more pressure ( from the more ideological people in power) to open up the USA aviation market to everyone around the world and mngmnt to try to find a way to outsource all jobs...(except theirs of course)
09-20-2017, 10:18 AM
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,808
The refinery's original forecast was for annual contributions of $300M, but with storm Sandy and some EPA compliance costs they were late achieving that. In the aftermath of Houston's post Harvey refinery woes, it'll be Q4-Q1 before the industry regains domestic equilibrium. In the short term it looks like DAL's Trainer refinery can easily beat the original revenue forecast in less than 2 quarters.
DAL makes more money than UAL because of the better focus on fully distributed network costs and contributions. UAL is starting to show signs of life on that front, but is still years behind. I agree with you that it'll be interesting to see how DAL's strategy for hedging fuel expense will stack up against UAL's auxiliary fee revenue model when global fuel prices rise.
09-20-2017, 11:06 AM
#18
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: 737 Captain
Posts: 872
Sorry for the ignorance but what exactly do you mean by that?
I is just pilot.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
09-21-2017, 06:28 AM
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,808
09-21-2017, 10:26 AM
#20
Stuck Mic
Joined APC: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,059
Scope give is a non-starter for me no matter what the rest of the contract entails. Watching hundreds of RJs all over the system and seeing them on the ramp is watching mainline jobs be flown for substantially less rates. All those RJ guys would LOVE to fly those same planes or larger for our pay rates.
I'm ok not seeing significantly higher pay rates and focus on QOL improvements like vacation, sick time, healthcare, retirement, training and online pay, squeezing scope more among a myriad of other improvements.
I'm ok not seeing significantly higher pay rates and focus on QOL improvements like vacation, sick time, healthcare, retirement, training and online pay, squeezing scope more among a myriad of other improvements.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
