Originally Posted by O2pilot

Except Northwest is gone!

Originally Posted by 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...

Originally Posted by pilot772

This statement is absolutely false. United ALPA IS interested in bringing these jets in house. Look no further then the recent scope video series they have put out. Also look at some of the tweets of our MC shortly after the new E-170’s owned by United were announced.

Originally Posted by 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.

Originally Posted by 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...

Originally Posted by HuskerAv8tor

In the end do we want to stake our reputation and potential future on a Trans States type regional? No offense to the pilots but that place is a train wreck with the United brand painted on their aircraft. With the press and public quick to slaughter United, I pray there is not another Colgan like crash on our watch. How much does that cost us in the long run to say nothing of lives lost.

Originally Posted by Itsajob

I believe that it’s hard to control the quality and consistency of a product when you farm it out, but don’t think that mainline companies are exempt from making stupid decisions and killing a bunch of people. AA drove a perfectly good 757 into a mountain and we almost did the same in a 737 not too long ago because the crew was descending into the mountains out of VNAV and then failed to follow standard terrain avoidance procedures when the computer was telling them that they were about to crash. People at all pay grades and experience levels are capable of costly mistakes.

Originally Posted by Itsajob

I really doubt that we’ll be flying 76 seat jets at mainline any time soon. It wasn’t farmed out overnight, and it will not be brought back overnight either. How’s this for a step in the right direction? Replace the flying being done now by the 76 seat jets with mainline 100-130 seat jets. Eliminate the 50 seat jets and give that flying to the existing 76 seat regionals. That’s not relaxing scope, we significantly shrink overall regional flying, and most importantly grow mainline. It’s definitely not everything bigger than 70 seats at mainline, but it’s better than what we have now. Also, something like the a220 would be favored by the customers rather than a bunch of 76 seat jets.