"Regional Airline Pilots: Welcome To The Rest Of Your Career

[kellwolf]

I don't think we'll see 120 seat airplanes at the regionals, but I do think we'll continue to see regionals get more 76 seat airplanes. So, if regionals get 2 76 seat airplanes instead of one 120 seat airplane, the damage is still done, and mainline pilots don't even need to give up more scope. It's already gone. Like I said, look at NWA. Are they replacing the DC-9s they retire with 195s at mainline or 175s at Compass?

Reducing the number of seats reduces the supply, thus allowing airlines to raise prices (theoretically). So, going from a 100 seat airplane to a 76 seat airplane is a win-win for mainline management.

[ATN_Pilot]

Originally Posted by Firebird2XC

I hate to say it man, but I think you're wrong here. We don't want to see 120-seaters at the "Regionals", but I think we'll see it eventually anyways.

Either that, or a glut of 74 and 90 seaters... and a parking of many of the existing 120 seaters.

I don't think we'll see much further on scope erosion. Most mainline MECs are currently working on strategies to recapture scope, so giving more away isn't really in the cards at this point. A more militant brand of reps like Capt. Wallach at UAL have taken the reigns of most MECs, so it's a different ball game than years past. If anything, I think we'll see some regionals go bankrupt over the next 5-10 years and the number of RJs will actually shrink.

[surreal1221]

That'll began soon. . .the moons and planets are aligning.

So long as the failing companies are actually allowed to fail instead of going into some "restructuring" ########.

Restructuring in the airline business is trying another failing policy of losing money.

[Trip7]

Originally Posted by kellwolf

I don't think we'll see 120 seat airplanes at the regionals, but I do think we'll continue to see regionals get more 76 seat airplanes. So, if regionals get 2 76 seat airplanes instead of one 120 seat airplane, the damage is still done, and mainline pilots don't even need to give up more scope. It's already gone. Like I said, look at NWA. Are they replacing the DC-9s they retire with 195s at mainline or 175s at Compass?

Reducing the number of seats reduces the supply, thus allowing airlines to raise prices (theoretically). So, going from a 100 seat airplane to a 76 seat airplane is a win-win for mainline management.

FYI, the new DAL/NWA agreement tightened scope by capping the number of 76 seaters even less than they are now. Pretty sure the new DCI is at or maybe even above that number...

[SoCalAprch]

I agree with 777 and PCL. I don't think its going to get worse. I think we may start seeing 195s and the types on mainline lists instead of regionals, its already happening with Airways, NWA, Jetblue... Those could have easily been put on with a regional. I know its tough for alot of people right now with all the furloughs and what not but I think it is going to get better. I agree that you should be comfortable with the fact that you may end up living out your career at a regional and prepare for that, but I don't think the picture is truly as gloomy as some are painting it. The days of making 400K flying a 747 and having 20 days off a month are probably over but I won't complain if I make 100K or 150k and fly 14 days a month.

[surreal1221]

100k-150k annually yields an ability to develop a safe retirement.

Unfortunately we have been going downward as opposed to upward in regards to pay.

I know I know - pay isn't everything.

But when there is no upticking, and sure - we're our own enemies - whatever, doesn't mean we can't work to improve our collective bargaining agreements (for those of us who believe in such devices) that yields to the negative impression of "Is this worth it?"

Because to be honest, much like another member here - I enjoy flying, but I got into this profession for the ability to develop a safe, reliable source of income come retirement. That means making 6 figures and change through a large portion of my career.

I mean I suppose if I came from the projects and hadn't had the youthful experiences of being surrounded by EAL/DAL Captains who enjoyed a very comfortable lifestyle I'd be happy making 35-80k a year for the rest of my life. But, I won't be. And yes, if that ends up looking like it'll be the majority of my earning potential - I'll be out of this industry pretty shortly there after to seek other more lucrative employment.

That though, doesn't mean that lucrative employment opportunities are dime a dozen, as we all know they are not. But people can market themselves well in certain industries a little bit better than the airline game considering negative impacts the industry has faced over the past two decades and will surely encounter in the future.

[jtrain609]

I look at things this way:

15 years ago folks said, "Jets at the regionals? Whatever, no big deal! We don't want those 50 seat jets!"

Then a few years later those mainline guys said, "Uhh...well, things are going down the crapper, if we let them fly 70 seaters, we can keep our retirement!"

Then we get 70 seaters at the regionals.

Then a few years later those mainline guys said, "Oh man, we're in REALLY bad shape, if we let them fly 86 seaters, we can keep our retirement!"

Then we get 86 seaters at the regionals.

It's only a matter of time guys. The formula works, it reduces the overall cost to the mainline companies and they will do what they have to do to force our hand with this. The mainline companies will have more bankruptcies of convenience and more contracts will get gutted.

It's a driving principal of capitalism guys, any cost that CAN go down WILL go down one way or another. We can't stop it, we're not strong enough to, and history tells us that we've never been strong enough to. I think that we're deluding ourselves by saying otherwise, when to me the facts are incredibly clear.

There's a trend here, and a couple of cats from the internet ain't gonna stop it. The only thing that will stop it is a REAL union, which none of us have. We're divided, and we'll fall just like we have every other time.

I mean seriously, when was the last time a pilot group REALLY stuck it to management and was successful in the end? American's contract is gone, and so is United. Management won guys, and Charlie is right; this is our career now.

[kellwolf]

Originally Posted by 777forever

FYI, the new DAL/NWA agreement tightened scope by capping the number of 76 seaters even less than they are now. Pretty sure the new DCI is at or maybe even above that number...

I've been asking to see the new deal, but no one wants to offer up the goods. If you've got it, I'd love to see it. If they tightened the scope, good for them. Like I said, I'd much rather fly that -900 at Delta than here, even if it meant going back to the right seat for a bit.

If the current DCI numbers are already at that number and some fat needs to be cut, I guess that tells us where those planes that were going to Comair are going. Not sure if Mesaba and Compass have taken delivery of all their orders yet or not, so that might be a factor as well. Now, if they tie the scope in with number of mainline planes (common practice), then mainline might take delivery of some new airframes to offset the difference.

[ATN_Pilot]

Originally Posted by jtrain609

The only thing that will stop it is a REAL union, which none of us have.

I beg to differ.

[Gonzo]

ALPA = Air Line Pilots Association
WHY?
Association sounds more white collar.
Union is blue collar works and a lot of pilots like to think they are better then blue collar workers.

[Trip7]

Originally Posted by jtrain609

I look at things this way:

15 years ago folks said, "Jets at the regionals? Whatever, no big deal! We don't want those 50 seat jets!"

Then a few years later those mainline guys said, "Uhh...well, things are going down the crapper, if we let them fly 70 seaters, we can keep our retirement!"

Then we get 70 seaters at the regionals.

Then a few years later those mainline guys said, "Oh man, we're in REALLY bad shape, if we let them fly 86 seaters, we can keep our retirement!"

Then we get 86 seaters at the regionals.

It's only a matter of time guys. The formula works, it reduces the overall cost to the mainline companies and they will do what they have to do to force our hand with this. The mainline companies will have more bankruptcies of convenience and more contracts will get gutted.

It's a driving principal of capitalism guys, any cost that CAN go down WILL go down one way or another. We can't stop it, we're not strong enough to, and history tells us that we've never been strong enough to. I think that we're deluding ourselves by saying otherwise, when to me the facts are incredibly clear.

There's a trend here, and a couple of cats from the internet ain't gonna stop it. The only thing that will stop it is a REAL union, which none of us have. We're divided, and we'll fall just like we have every other time.

I mean seriously, when was the last time a pilot group REALLY stuck it to management and was successful in the end? American's contract is gone, and so is United. Management won guys, and Charlie is right; this is our career now.

Kids, don't do crack.....j/k

You and Charlie's thought process are highly flawed IMO.

86 seats are only at Airways. CAL's scope is still at 50 seats and I doubt it'll be changing anytime soon.

I don't get your REAL union point so you'll have to elaborate on that.

Last time we stuck it to management? Ah, the Summer of Love. Didn't turn out so well later but at least we can say we "stuck it to em!"

Management won? To me we were backing them into a dark alleyway last year when they started offering signing bonuses (PCL, MESA, Republic), free RJ courses (Eagle) until Congress came in and saved them (age 65)

This industry is cyclical. We are headed down right now now but it will pick back up. No need for the doom and gloom, the world is over posts. I heard this same forum doom and gloom happened after 9-11 for a couple years.

I'm telling you, in a couple years it'll be back to the ATP vs FBO and Low Timers at the regionals threads we had during the past hiring spree.

[Gonzo]

I hope your right, but even after 9-11 it wasn't this bad. You got UA and US in bad shape. Mesa is almost out of money. XJT is getting F-ed with by CAL. Who knows how CHQ is going to look after DAL/NW. APA is trying to end Eagle.

[Firebird2XC]

Originally Posted by PCL_128

I don't think we'll see much further on scope erosion. Most mainline MECs are currently working on strategies to recapture scope, so giving more away isn't really in the cards at this point. A more militant brand of reps like Capt. Wallach at UAL have taken the reigns of most MECs, so it's a different ball game than years past. If anything, I think we'll see some regionals go bankrupt over the next 5-10 years and the number of RJs will actually shrink.

Scope erosion is well at work everywhere, everyday. Losing out to bigger airplanes at regionals isn't even always the issue.

Example: The AA flights from DFW-ORD are always jammed full. Be nice to get some more going, right? How about from DAL? Love Field and the Wright Amendment limit how big an airplane you can get out of there, etc, etc. Can ya get around it? Sure! Just take the AE 50 seaters that were doing the MCI/AUS runs and have 'em fly DAL-ORD. Popular with the downtown Dallas business crowd? You bet.

It's that easy. It started years ago and has been creeping in like the tide ever since. Back when Bob Crandall parked some DC-10s, the MD-80s had to pick up the slack. So if there's no MD-80 to cover the DFW-SHV run, who does it?

Eagle did it. With a Saab-340. Nowadays, it's an ERJ run.

It's that easy. Once the precedent is set, it becomes that much harder to be able to take it back under the limitation of Scope.

At this point, I'd say it's evolve or die.

[jtrain609]

Word holmes, bro here's spot on.

Warren Buffet has said that anything with high labor costs in this country will be moved out as soon as it possibly can to places where lower labor costs are available. If you can't move the products production (in this case, our flying) out of the country, there better be a really good reason for the production sticking around here, and even still market forces will force wages down.

We haven't even begun to see how little folks will fly mainline airplanes for, either. I think we've got a pretty good idea of what pilots will fly RJ's for, and we're at it. Now that we've proven we can and WILL fly jets for $40,000 in the right seat and $80,000 a year in the left seat, there's nothing to stop wages from being forced to an equilibrium point based around those wages at the upper end.

Years ago some VERY smart folks on this forum were yelling and screaming about how we took Metroliner pay rates and extended them up to get our current RJ rates instead of taking 737 rates and extending them down. We'll never get those 737 rates back, and again; market forces will continue to force wages down until we start crashing airplanes because all the qualified pilots out there are gone.

Further, we're not a real union. The longshoremen have a real union. Plumbers have real unions, as do electricians. If we had a real union, we'd be employed by the union and contracted out by our airlines to do our work. We'd get our health insurance from the union and we'd get our retirement from the union.

And Todd, I'd love to hear how you think we've actually beaten back management in the last 15 years AND HELD ONTO THE GAINS. We haven't made any gains, we've only slowed down managements progress. Without the union the degregation of our career would be much faster, but all we're doing is slowing down the downward spiral instead of preventing it and turning it backwards. We talk about taking it back, but we'll take a concessionary contract to keep our jobs when our companies are mismanaged and shrug and say, "Well I'd rather lose 5% than lose my job!" It's just that after a couple of those, you didn't lose 5%, you lost 50% (ala Delta).

I'm not saying this because of the downward trend that's happening in the industry, or because of my furlough. Ya'll think I'm some bitter old coot, but that couldn't be any further from the truth. I have my eyes wide open, and I'm seeing what's happening in this industry. Since deregulation we've had a series of cycles and every time the industry dips, we never regain what we once had. While things will get better and worse, the overall trend of that sine wave will be a downward trend unless we can do some things to truly arrest the free fall we're in. We haven't been able to do it since 1982, and I doubt we'll be able to do it in the next 10 years.

[ATN_Pilot]

Originally Posted by Gonzo

ALPA = Air Line Pilots Association
WHY?
Association sounds more white collar.
Union is blue collar works and a lot of pilots like to think they are better then blue collar workers.

"Association" is just a name. As a legal entity, and in practice, it's a union.

Originally Posted by jtrain609

If we had a real union, we'd be employed by the union and contracted out by our airlines to do our work. We'd get our health insurance from the union and we'd get our retirement from the union.

That's a guild, not a union. What we have is a union.

And Todd, I'd love to hear how you think we've actually beaten back management in the last 15 years AND HELD ONTO THE GAINS. We haven't made any gains, we've only slowed down managements progress.

Talk to the super-senior folks at your company and ask them how much things have improved since the days of the old CAL Express carriers like Brit Air. ALPA has made tremendous gains and held on to them at all of the regional carriers. Have we taken a beating at the legacy level? Yep. That was inevitable because of deregulation. It has nothing to do with not having a "real union," it's about not having friendly lawmakers and regulators. If we get 8+ years of a friendly administration, then things will take a turn for the better. Your pessimism is unwarranted. If McCain gets elected, then I'll join you in your pit of misery, but not until then.

[kellwolf]

Originally Posted by 777forever

86 seats are only at Airways. CAL's scope is still at 50 seats and I doubt it'll be changing anytime soon.

The Q400 begs to differ.....

[kellwolf]

Originally Posted by PCL_128

"
That's a guild, not a union. What we have is a union.

I'd love to have a pension paid for by the union that followed me no matter which airline I went to. My mom has that, but she's in the Teamsters. Are they a "guild" or a "union?"


Todd, I know things are better with ALPA than without, but there are some short comings. There are things ALPA could do MUCH better if there wasn't such cut throat issues between different MECs. It would have taken just a slight nudge to put Mesaga and Pinnacle MECs at each others' throats, and NWA was trying their best to make that happen. If they weren't distracted by a merger right now, they probably would still be playing that game. I'd like to say that if Skywest were ALPA, they wouldn't have been used as a gun put to XJT's head by CAL to get a cheaper deal for regional flying. But I can't honestly say that. In many ways the "not a real union" argument has a bit of merit.

[SoCalAprch]

I just think its funny that 10 months ago no one was talking about all this doom and gloom yet we were still flying the same planes for the same pay and regionals were growing at a fast rate. Now regionals are furloughing and shrinking. Isn't this not what all you guys were saying needed to happen to keep these mainline jobs available for us in the future? As soon as the economy takes a hit and a few people hit the streets the world is suddenly coming to an end. I remember when I first came over here everyone with any sense always talked about how this industry is cyclical. Now some of those same people are saying its never gonna end. Some of us can be really short sighted in my opinion. The economy will rebound and it will be back to business as usual and hopefully we can get a labor friendly government to help us take back the stuff that management has taken in the last 8 years.

[kellwolf]

Originally Posted by SoCalAprch

Now regionals are furloughing and shrinking. Isn't this not what all you guys were saying needed to happen to keep these mainline jobs available for us in the future?

It's half of what needs to happen. The other half is for mainline to take delivery of airplanes to replace the ones that the regionals lost. If they don't, it's just a net loss of jobs, not a re-allocation of jobs.

[ATN_Pilot]

Originally Posted by kellwolf

I'd love to have a pension paid for by the union that followed me no matter which airline I went to. My mom has that, but she's in the Teamsters. Are they a "guild" or a "union?"

ALPA has explored this idea, but found it to be unworkable. R & I was never one of my strong suits, so I didn't keep up on the details. Not sure what the reasons were for dismissing the idea. In any case, what I was referring to about a guild was the idea that you work for your guild and are simply assigned an employer as work becomes available, as jtrain suggested.

It would have taken just a slight nudge to put Mesaga and Pinnacle MECs at each others' throats

I disagree. We had a superb relationship with the MSA MEC, and I don't see anything that could have put us at each others' throats. Maybe the individual rank-and-file pilots would have felt animosity towards each other, but not the leadership.

Look, ALPA isn't perfect, and I've never claimed that it is. But the "not a real union" argument is bull----. Just because a union has faults, as all unions do, doesn't mean that it ceases to be a union. We should work towards fixing the faults and move on. Throwing our hands up in the air and claiming that ALPA isn't a "real union" will get us nowhere. You want to see a union that isn't a "real" union? Come to where I work, where my union isn't even AFL-CIO affiliated. Then you'll have a real argument for "not a real union."

[kellwolf]

Sorry, I just don't see truckers undercutting fellow truckers for more driving or career advancement. I think one of ALPA's biggest flaws is that they don't stick to the "jacking up the house" philosophy that used to be around. I don't have a lot of confidence that if an ALPA carrier took a lesser contract than, say ASA, in order to undercut them for growth that ALPA national wouldn't approve the contract. That's how it should be. If a pilot group takes a lesser than than average contract in order to secure growth and advancement, it doesn't make it past National. The guys in the president seat would be sweating more over if they were gonna make it past the next election than what's the best for the regional pilots as a whole. That's just how I feel.

[killbilly]

Originally Posted by Firebird2XC

Example: The AA flights from DFW-ORD are always jammed full. Be nice to get some more going, right? How about from DAL? Love Field and the Wright Amendment limit how big an airplane you can get out of there, etc, etc.

They repealed the Wright Amendment, mostly - there are still some restrictions, but I don't think that's one. I might be wrong. SWA does regular flights from DAL to MDW with stops in either MCI or STL.

If you're speaking direct to ORD, I don't think there is a limitation on AA from running a 73 out of there to ORD, but again, I might be wrong.

[FlyChicaga]

I just wanted to throw this out there: If we rename the Airline Pilots Association to the Airline Pilots Union, we'll have to refer to it as "APU." That sucks.

Anyways, back to saving the world everyone.

[jtrain609]

Dude that'd be AWESOME! Then we could make stickers for our flight kits that say, "APU FAIL" when somebody gets a crappy contract or their company has to furlough.

[staplegun]

FWIW, the Delta Pilot contract has pay rates for the Emb-195, Emb-190 and CRJ-900. If management wants those aircraft Delta pilots will fly them.

IMO scope is going to get tighter as time goes on.

You will see plenty of 70-seaters and some 76-seaters in the Delta system, but the 50-seaters are just going to start to go away. It's all about seat/mile costs, not payroll. We finally have a management that gets that.


Kevin