Is CHQ Growing?

[rtmcfi]

er. Sorry if this isn't the right place to ask a genuine question, but if I asked it elsewhere it would just turn in to a flamefest anyway, so why not. The question is "what is the problem with CHQ?" It seems that CHQ shows up next to Mesa, TSA, and Colgan fairly often in discussions on this board. Why is that? Without debating the relative merits of Mesa, TSA, and Colgan, which I'm sure are fine companies with a quick upgrade and everything if you're so inclined, why does CHQ fit in to the same category, or seem to anyway? As far as I can tell, the pay is mid to slightly high for a regional, upgrade is short although not terribly short. Lots of bases. Just doesn't seem that bad from the outside. What am I missing? I understand that the work rules aren't as great as, say, XJET, but are they that bad? Hostile management? What's the deal?

Also: I don't care whether EMBSKILLZ and similar transparent baiters actually work for CHQ or not. Every airline has a numbnuts or two, including yours, so let's try to avoid the ludicrousness of painting an entire pilot group with a broad brush based on what you read on the internet. Thanks.

Regards,
Boris

Boris-

Every airline that had it good, and then got undercut by someone else, dislikes the undercuter. CHQ has a pretty good product. What CHQ lacks, is a fair contract. The guys that voted on their last pay contract elected to throw the FO's under the bus to get growth. It worked. CHQ is growing quickly, and guys are upgrading quickly. Problem is, when the music stops, you better hope you are in your desired chair, as you may be siting in it for a while. The 7th year FO stuck in the right seat of a 170, making 35$ an hour is not going to be a happy fellow.

 

[Boris Badenov]

Thanks for the replies. As a prospective employee, not to put too fine a point on it, but when do y'all think the upgrade music is going to stop, and is a late 2006 hire likely to be left standing?

Regards,
Boris