ex j-41 said:On another note: 900's are bad for pilot job security. You can haul more people less frequently. Meaning less pilot jobs and reduced hours for those flying. For every 2 900's on property, we could lose 3 200's, and still carry the same amount of people. 33% of pilots could lose their jobs if we vote yes. All the more reason to just say NO!
But if that was true we'd just dump all the 50 seaters now and fly 737s, in fact if it was really true we'd just fly 747s everywhere. True, Albany, NY might get a 747 every 6 months of so but heck we'd be carrying the same number of people, what are people bitching about?
*I* can't imagine why US Air would give PSA 900s and then take away 200s - although maybe that makes sense for some obscure reason. Isn't the PSA rate blended, so if they reduce the 200 flying the overall rate goes up and US Air ends up spending more to get the 900s flown. If anything you'd think they were motivated to give PSA MORE 200 flying to get the 900 rate down.