RJDC letter to DW

[BeCareful!]

Because I really don't want to spend much time on this: Can one of you RJDC's please explain to me what the end game is here? How big an aircraft would satisfy your needs? And at what kind of pay and benefits?

Trying to get a sense of the nature of the beast.

 

[michael707767]

2. The RJDC litigation was filed to protect contract 96 scope. In case you don't have a copy handy, ASA was operating 105 seat jets and had rights to unlimited 70 seaters. The E170 / 190 would be an idea airframe under CY96 scope.

Lets tell the whole truth here. Cause you like to make it seem that you could fly all the 105 seat jets you wanted in 96. Contract 96 did not allow unlimited 105 seat jets. You were limited to a small number (I forget the exact number, but around 15?) of a specific type of airplane, the BAE-146. There was no provision to replace it with another 105 seater should the -146 go away. So the -190 was out. And I don't have that contract in front of me, but the E-170 did not fit that contracts definition of a 70 seater, since it was only a recent change that allowed an aircraft configured for 70 seats vs certified for 70 seats. So the E-170 was out.

I do expect you will end up with unlimited 70 seaters though. So you want to go back to contract 96 scope, then lets do it.

 

[regionaltard]

The notion of SJ's "belonging" to the regionals seems like scope in reverse.

I wonder why it is that people who seem to find fault with the RJDC often reiterate the RJDC's positions in their arguments here?

Scope is scope, ALPA's belated attempt to cover its tracks by hastily changing a Constitution that had served it well notwithstanding.

 

[finnjl]

This is a pretty simple concept:

If you fly for a major airline you are against regional airlines getting bigger airplanes. That makes perfect sense as mainline pilots are afraid about loosing their jobs or even worse having to fly for a regional. On the other hand if you fly for a regional you want more and bigger jets as your livelihood depends on it. So really it depends on who you work for. I think people over complicate rather simple issues.

From a management point of view you would want to use the equipment that is appropriate for the market and the most cost effective.

I am somewhat against unions dictating to management the best way to run their particular airline. I find unions somewhat outdated and sometimes they seem to be a bigger bureaucracy than airline management themselves. Although, I guess some unions still have a purpose. I used to get RJDC information and I can see where they are going but I am not 100% sure if that is a good idea. The argument against RJDC is majors will no longer exist and everyone will make Regional pilot pay. Not defending regional pilot pay but some companies have taken significant steps in improving benefits and pay at regional airlines. There are a few regional airlines after 10-15 years with the company you will make over 100,000 per year. That is better than 90% of the workers in America make.

I guess where I am going with all this is I see in the future the days of the 20 year Delta captain making 300,000/year going away. I see the distinction between regional and major airlines going away. I think that the huge disparity in pay will close together. I can see the bottom pay increasing somewhat to what your typical college graduate earns and the top pay decreasing significantly. I can see a pay range between 35,000-150,000 per year. In the not too distant future I can see some of the Legacy carriers going away as they are not able to adjust quickly enough to current economic demands. That is most unfortunate but I feel that unions and some of the airline employees that are resistant to change will be at fault for this to some degree. Once the Legacy carrier goes away another more efficient airline will fill the void left behind. I think a couple of the LCC will probably operate as a Legacy carriers providing air service to cities where today’s regional airlines currently provide service. For what it is worth the LCC has to ability to provide better and more efficient service. I sincerely hope that everyone associated with a legacy airline can get their act together to assure to future viability of the company and the airlines that are associated with them.

I have worked for a regional before and have gotten out of the business only to realize that flying airplanes is a pretty good job. I recently got hired by one of the better paid regional airlines and received an offer by one of the not so good ones. Unfortunately the better paid regional flies for Delta and they are somewhat unpredictable as I found out here in DFW. Of course the other flies for Northwest and they are not the most stable airline out there either.

I ended up off of the topic but I noticed that happens all the time on these boards.

 

[AutoBus]

New ALPA policy should be.

Park all small (50 seat and under) RJ's, the rest should be flown by mainline.

With all these little RJ lift providers (I don't call them airlines, because they are not) trying to steal each others contracts with the majors, airline pay and benefits are nothing but a race to the bottom.

MESA reduces cost, steals contract from CHQ.

forces CHQ to lower cost even more, couple of years later CHQ steals contract from MESA.

Goes on and on, never stops.

End result, Regional Jet Lift Provider entry level pay is less than it was 15 years ago.

 

[miles otoole]

New ALPA policy should be.

Park all small (50 seat and under) RJ's, the rest should be flown by mainline.

With all these little RJ lift providers (I don't call them airlines, because they are not) trying to steal each others contracts with the majors, airline pay and benefits are nothing but a race to the bottom.

MESA reduces cost, steals contract from CHQ.

forces CHQ to lower cost even more, couple of years later CHQ steals contract from MESA.

Goes on and on, never stops.

End result, Regional Jet Lift Provider entry level pay is less than it was 15 years ago.

Isn't this capitalism? Gateway lowers prices, steals business from Dell. Dell lowers prices, steals business from HP and Gateway. ALPA goes bye bye.

 

[BenderGonzales]

Autobus said, "End result, Regional Jet Lift Provider entry level pay is less than it was 15 years ago."

Bad news. Adjusted for inflation this has been happening since deregulation.

We all like to "act" like $100,000 is a lot of money. Fact is that as time goes on its buying power will be less and less.

In the late 70s and early 80s the airline pilot that earned six figures was a wealthy man. Today he is middle-class.

There's not anything wrong with that, but lets call a spade a spade. Airline pilot spending power is significantly less than it was 15 years ago.

 

[BenderGonzales]

Miles,

It is a large part of capitalism yes -- but if that were all there was to capitalism, then Wal-Mart would be the only business in existance.

Despite what the detractors may say, it IS possible to compete with the Wal-Mart's of the world. Even if you assume that Target and Wal-Mart and Dollar-General will always be the low-price leaders, you simply have to provide one of two things:

#1. A product or service that they do not offer, or

#2. A shopping experience that is significantly better -- so much so that it adds perceived value.

So you're partially correct. We as pilots have to figure out a way to raise our perceived value beyond its true (supply vs. demand) dollar amount.

 

[AutoBus]

Isn't this capitalism? Gateway lowers prices, steals business from Dell. Dell lowers prices, steals business from HP and Gateway. ALPA goes bye bye.

Capitalism?, when you buy a gateway you get a gateway, when you buy a dell you get a dell. When you buy a ticket on an airline you expect to fly on that airline, not a lowest bidder contractor, even if they disclosed which contractor you are flying on when you purchased your ticket, odds are it could change by the time you actually fly.

Eventually, most of the 50 (and below) seaters are going away, they just are not cost effective. With fuel prices the way they are today that may happen more quickly. If fuel prices come down it may take longer to play out.

70 seaters not too far behind,

90 seaters might make some sense, but the margins are too thin, so thin that the 5 to 7 percent profit margin they give away to the RJ operators (they want to make a profit) actualy makes the 90 seat RJ flying unpofitable for mainline. So if mainline can get labor costs anywhere close (does not need to be as low, just close) to that of the RJ operator, it makes more sense for mainline to operate those aircraft itself and retain that margin.

The winds of change are a coming, who's flying the RJ's at Jet Blue? Who's going to fly the 190's at the new US Airways (aka AWA)?

Interestingly AirTran had a brief interlude with RJ's, they discovered it wasn't cost effective, they found it only cost a few bucks more to fly the routes in the 717 themselves and get all the control and double the seats.

 

[JoeMerchant]

Hmm, I'll take that bet. Here at Delta at least, I think the 70 seates are gone to us, no matter how cheaply we offered to fly them. So I don't think we will even try. In the end I think our mainline pay will be so low, they can effectively fly larger airplanes anyway. As far as USAir goes, I agree with you. I think its shameful what they did there, and frankly brought us all down.
Michael

Michael,
How about the 90 seaters? Do you think the DAL MEC, or anyother mainline MEC would undercut regionals to capture the E190s? I believe they would.

Would you oppose ASA flying 90 seaters for another codeshare partner now that we aren't going to be wholly owned?

Would you oppose ASA/Skywest flying 100+ seaters on their own, separate from the Delta codeshare?

Joe