Grumble

Are you high?

Pop quiz, an RJ captain at SkyWest pays how much in ALPA dues? What would that same seat/fleet pay in ALPA dues under the UPA on property? Apply that same test to every other regional.

That’s what I thought.

There’s NOTHIBG herculean about it, the only thing we have to do is say no, that’s it. Period.

horrido27

Keep in mind.. if WE are the first ones to bring back ALL flying in house, we had better hope our fellow ALPA/APA brothers & sisters follow suit.

If not, UCH/United will tank both in the stock market and in way reduced profits due to much higher labor costs.

Keep in mind, the reason we have this problem is that Delta/ALPA shifted scope back in the day (90's?!).. that started the chain reaction that we have today.
USAir allowed 70/76 seaters that resulted in a "new" shift to stay competitive.

Delta allowed a bunch of 70/76 seaters for a trade where their pilots got B717's and now CS100/300's (A220's).

The company has the means to add more 70/76 seaters tomorrow.
They just have to follow 1-C-1.
Pretty easy.

They are just trying to negotiate wherein they get a cost advantage against Delta and America.
It's a 3 way battle.. We have to fight management who is at the same time competing against the other Legacy/National carriers.

I'm all for recapturing the flying.. I just don't know at what cost?
And while we are at it.. shouldn't this be an ALPA National fight, not a UAL/ALPA fight?! And where are the other work groups...?
Flight Attendant union?
Mechanic's union?

Just throwing it out there.

I expect we will keep saying NO to ANY scope shift.. company will keep asking for it.. we will go into 2019 with our current CBA which gives us all raises for one more year.. then 2020 rolls around and pilots start getting antsy. 2021 we head to the NMB and we all know how labor friendly they are~

Motch

Sniper66

Northwest Airlines
DC9-10
78 seats mainline aircraft

DC9-30
99 seats

It was working fine and profitable

Think about it. It will be profitable at mainline if management have a plan!

Regionals are paying 300% to cover their flying and mainline gets the bill from them
That includes your beloved Trans States

Grumble

It’s managements job to keep us profitable. It’s our job to make sure that profitability doesn’t come from our paychecks.

Firsttimeflyer

I’m sorry but higher labor costs.....sat next to a couple TSA ( United express) captains today who are getting 300% for any trip picked up for the month. One guy even said he is completely happy where he is at.

New hires getting 45k signing bonus.

And the company (TSA) still making a profit. Apparently republic loooking at buying compass and trans states.

And he mentioned they have the worst on time and completion..... so excuse me for calling total BS on higher labor costs. Cut their Management out of the picture, cut out regional leazion managers off our payroll teet, control flying in house and it’s a triple win....labor/management/stockholders. Even the passengers might be happier = quadruple win.

Firsttimeflyer

I’m sorry, but that seems like a ladder getting pulled up pretty hard.

Enough guys have suffered delays in their careers, the regional world, the “b/c” scale, the ridicule from “mainline” pilots for even deciding to fly for a regional so I shall shun you in the terminal look....

Obviously that previous cost came and went, now we at mainline have the real possibility to stop scope in its tracks or even retake some of it.

I honestly don’t know why we are just saying to leave scope alone.

When the company brings up scope in negotiations and wants to talk about it, we should be saying yes, absolutely, we want to bring all 51+ seat flying back to mainline and here is how seniority/hiring would fall (100% below current seniority list) and a timeframe to bring all those pilots onto mainline property. Their jaws will drop....

horrido27

If you really believe that us operating 70/76 seaters at mainline, with mainline pay AND benefits for ALL those employees that come with the aircraft (2 pilots and 2 FA's, plus the mechanics...)(Pay, workrules, Hotels, Retirement, Medical benefits, vacation) is cheaper than what we do now, ok. Not going to be able to change your mind.

However.. if it WERE cheaper, EVERY airline would be doing it.
If WE are the first to do it, WE better hope that Delta and American follow suit.

As far as a singe TSA crew saying they are getting 300%.. that's great. We also have certain BES's that are getting constant SRM/100% PPU. But it's about the overall, year long labor cost.

And it's great to point out the NWA DC9's. Where are they now? What happen to holding the line back then?
Maybe after their merger with Delta, they gave them up for other things gained in their PWA?
At least the merged Delta pilots decided to force the company to get a NSNB (at the time, B717) for added big RJ's. We did not. We only put 1-C-1 in our CBA.
Now Delta is also getting the CS/A aircraft.. but they are NOT flying any 70/76 seaters.

We too could have a 100-130 seater, but management has (so far) decided against it. It's a negotiating tactic.. I get it.

It's great to see so many potential NO voters for the next TA when it doesn't include bringing back 70/76 seaters to mainine, at an A scale.

Guess I live in the real world and understand that UNTIL every unionized Pilot group demands it and every other unionized work group demands it, it's just a pipe dream.

Again, if Scope is so important.. why do we even have 70/76 seaters operating right now?!
I will be pleasantly shocked if we don't 'shift' scope. Fully expect that we will shift the weight limit to include the E175-E2 to be operated at the Express level.
(Also expect the E190/195E2 will remain artificially low thanks to the new JetBlue contract.. and the 76-4 will be pay banded with the 76-3, but outside of the 777/787, at a rate BARELY higher than current rates)

As Grumble pointed out-
It’s managements job to keep us profitable. It’s our job to make sure that profitability doesn’t come from our paychecks.



Every management team (Delta, United, American, USAir, NWA and Continental) determined that there were more profits to be made by outsourcing... and every pilot group follow suit by voting in contracts (be it by force (NMB), by bankruptcy or by greed) that allowed it.

If we are going to be the first airline to change course (do a 180) and demand that 70/76 seaters come (back?) to mainline, OUTSTANDING.
I just expect that we will then end up at the NMB sometime in 2020+ and don't think that they will agree with us~
Just my opinion.

Motch

PS) We should ALL be outraged that our company used our money to purchase aircraft that will NOT be flown by our employees!

Zoomie

Here's the deal... The cost of bringing that flying back to mainline isn't a "pilot only" cost. If it were only a pilot labor cost, then there is no doubt it would be a higher cost because I don't think any one of us at mainline will sign a contract that gives the type of pay and QOL at current regionals..no one is debating pilot cost will go up bringing that flying back to mainline, but that is just one of many line item costs of bringing the flying back.

However, removing the infrastructure of 3-4 entire regional airlines will provide economies of scale. There will be less management, less duplicate positions, liaisons between the two companies, etc... Take into consideration that on top of the profit mainline makes from having those RJ aircraft, the express carriers also make a profit as well, otherwise they wouldn't do business. There's also a liability cost of outsourcing. It's much easier to control operations and procedures without outsourcing. There are other considerations, which are if the flying were brought back to mainline, United could have an unlimited number of 76 seat jets, and perhaps could turn the 76 seat jets into 80 or 82 seat jets, and no limit on the "certified" MGW or distance flown. Delta/American/Alaska/United all have limits on the number of those aircraft currently. Who knows what the optimum number management really wants? The real reason the numbers are tough to overcome is probably due to the actual contracts with the regional airlines. If we took the flying back in-house, then it would most likely trigger some clause in the agreement for United to pay a lot of money. I believe DL has been in many lawsuits of this type when killing some of their express flying that was unprofitable.

None of us here have access to all that financial data to know for sure the total cost of bringing those aircraft back to mainline, so lets please stop saying that it's going to put United at a financial disadvantage. One could argue it could possibly put us at a financial advantage, but there is definitely some risk involved, since it would require a management team with some steel "cojones" to give it a shot. I bet our management thought DL was stupid for taking the 717 from SWA, as I didn't see United or USAir/American make a bid for them from SWA...

I would love to see that flying come back to mainline, but I'm also not holding my breath. We held out for years and then DL cut us down at the knees when they sold the 76 seat scope.

So, I agree it's a longshot to see that flying come back to mainline at <=76 seats, but I wouldn't say that it would be a guaranteed handicap, and there is an argument that it would make us stronger. SWA doesn't outsource any aircraft either, I don't see them shrinking any time soon...

Grumble

Woman in IAH getting off flight says to me in a thick Texas drawl:

“That was just the best flight hun.”
Me: well thank you, hope to see you again
Her: oh we will, but we were on one of those express flight for our first flight this morning and that was just the worst!
Me: We’re fighting to take that back! You have a great day.
Her: oh that would be splendid to not have to get on those tiny things anymore!


Meanwhile we have dues paying members running around making manamgents case snorkeling in Kirby’s butt...

O2pilot

Except Northwest is gone!