Originally Posted by YANXJTPilot

Mexico I understand has a national seniority list. The electrician union would never make a master electrician start over at a new company at apprentice wages.

True Flow? I've always find it ironic we could carry United's passengers on our metal, and not get hired by United. Heck, they own 49% of us and the planes. But we're not "good enough". Our metrics and safety record say differently. Not a p contest, just data.

As for cutting scope, that's naturally occurring. We have 40-50 airplanes on property or inbound from TSA we can't staff. TSA as I understood it couldn't staff. Part of it can be answered thusly: how many young people do you even know that CARE that you're an airline pilot, much less want to become one?

At our height we had 210 jets, now last I heard we operate around 80. And that's after combining our pilot group with ASA. It would be interesting to compute how many regional pilots there are now vs. say 2007 or so. My feeling is saying scope is naturally being handled but I haven't done the math.

Originally Posted by baseball

3. It's a conflict of interest to use mainline dues money to negotiate against mainline pilots and go after the same revenue stream. "Jim Johnson. ALPA legal."

Originally Posted by Cessna182TypeR

Your numbers are all off.

-36 Inbound XR’s from TSA (once XJT flown 5 yrs ago)

-XJT once flew 258+ planes on the legacy side alone. The airline has only shrunk since.

Originally Posted by John Carr

Nope, it was used on the other legacies in the 90's before COEX/CAL.

Originally Posted by Itsajob

It will be interesting to see how some of our furlough protections are applied. If we furlough deep enough (1/23/2016), some expensive provisions kick in. The 76 seat jets have to be reconfigured to 70 seats, and the companies operating those jets have to hire our furloughed pilots at 2nd year pay. It will be hard for them to hire our pilots when they are potentially looking at furloughs too.

Originally Posted by flightlessbirds

Which makes them higher CASM (by 8%) and the same fixed/variable operating costs. With 10-15% loads now and 20-30% for the foreseeable future this all will make them uncompetitive with 50 seat flying, not withstanding SKs townhall comments. He wants them to replace mainline NB flying. Economics rule, and I don’t think we’ve seen the end of the 50 seaters if we start ripping seats out of Embraer larger RJs.

Originally Posted by Itsajob

My guess is that the company is going to use this to clean up the operation. People hate the CRJ 200 and the E145, and for good reason. Unless your paycheck comes from flying them, they won’t be missed. The customer reviews on the CRJ 550 are actually pretty positive. As demand returns we’ll probably see reduced frequency, but on larger planes. Instead of 5 flights on a 50 seater, you may see 3 on a 76 seat jet. Routes like my commute could go from 8 flights on 76 seaters to 4-5 on a NB.

Originally Posted by airlinepilot50

XJET will eventually park the E145s for larger jets.

Originally Posted by Itsajob

For once you and I agree. XJET will park the E145, and the route will be flown using a larger jet. Your problem is that they will be flown by another regional using existing big rj’s, or by United.