Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

500 upgrades at Republic

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Your statement is about as closed minded as statements get. I guess I should not expect anything less from this board.

Patients is a virtue and the future holds what the future holds. RAH's current contract is pretty good in most areas. Yes RAH's contract has Grey areas, yes the contract needs improvement, and yes loopholes need to be closed.

Tweaking takes time and patients. Negotiations are painstakingly draining, stressfully and sometimes doubtfull. Those looking for the hear and now are short changing themselves. You obviously do not have the, "Big Picture", in mind.

If you work at RAH have some patients,

amen brother
 
Their F.O. payscale.

Also, a lack of scheduling work rules (trip regs, duty regs, etc.) that add up to more credit paid at the end of the month. These have a higher impact on overall compensation than straight pay rates.

That is true. 2nd yr at RAH is $30 vs. $34 at a few others. Hopefully that will be addressed in the next contract. However, I'd rather make $4 less for one year, but then spend 5 years at $10 more as captain.

The catch is that RAH has a flat FO scale. The $30 is above average for 35-50 seaters, but below for 70-86 seats.
 
196 Upgrades effective date of May 1st or earlier...straight from a company memo

Mesa sucks and Go Jet (Lindbergh) is a disgrace.

That's all

Go Colts!
 
Their F.O. payscale.

Also, a lack of scheduling work rules (trip regs, duty regs, etc.) that add up to more credit paid at the end of the month. These have a higher impact on overall compensation than straight pay rates.
I already average 90hrs a month on an 78-82hr line, I bid min schedule. WTF are you guys getting? Is 90hrs not reasonable?
 
Last edited:
Sticky said:
The catch is that RAH has a flat FO scale. The $30 is above average for 35-50 seaters, but below for 70-86 seats.

2nd year 50 seat FO rates
ARW: 35.91 (concessionary)
SKW: 34.89
ASA TA: 34.72
CMR: ~34 (concessionary)
ASA: 33.65
XJT: 33.62
EGL: ~32
PSA: ~30
MAG: ~29
MES: 28.03
PDT: ~28 (DHC)
TSA: ~25
PNCL: 24.39

Mean/average: $31.02
Median: EGL @ ~$32.00
 
I already average 90hrs a month on an 78-82hr line, I bid min schedule. WTF are you guys getting? Is 90hrs not reasonable?

Wait until you (and the entire company) lose a day or two of flying due to winter WX cancellations. Kinda hard to hit 98.5% montly completion when that happens...
 
It doesn't matter when your flying big Shiney Jets with a 2 year upgrade. Republic Rocks!!!
 
2nd year 50 seat FO rates
ARW: 35.91 (concessionary)
SKW: 34.89
ASA TA: 34.72
CMR: ~34 (concessionary)
ASA: 33.65
XJT: 33.62
EGL: ~32
PSA: ~30
MAG: ~29
MES: 28.03
PDT: ~28 (DHC)
TSA: ~25
PNCL: 24.39

Mean/average: $31.02
Median: EGL @ ~$32.00

wow..good effort. I was a couple pennys off. Our next contract should boost the FO pay hopefully. The problem is that it will still be flat pay. Its gotta be tough to come up with a FO scale competative accross the 35-86 seat market. My guess is $35-$37 in the next TA....if we all live that long.
 
Last edited:
Not bustin your chops...I know the strengths and weaknesses of your CBA.

Information and knowledge is power, especially when it comes to collective bargaining.

Believe me, my airline (and everyone else out there) stands to gain in our bargaining efforts by RAH getting a kickass contract...and I'll be there with you folks on Purdue Road picketing if it comes down to it...
 
Sticky said:
The problem is that it was still be flat pay.

WHY????

If you want the 135/140/145 to pay the same thats fine...but pilots on the 170 & 175 need to earn more because of the increased seats, size and responsibility. To settle for someone flying 37 seats making same as someone flying 86 seats is asinine...especially when CA pay is type-dependent.

60% of CA pay or bust!
 

Latest posts

Latest resources

Back
Top