Scope relaxed for DCI?

[79%N1]

Here's a question: If DCI put out a RFP for E170s, would CHQ pilots lower the rates to Mesa levels "To get the growth"?


My bet is yes. This is the reason other pilts don't like CHQ and Mesa. Its not the individual pilots, it's the fact that they do vote to accept low rates to "get the growth", thereby undercutting other carriers who won't do that, usually for the mainline carrier that they are OWNED BY. Its a fact that if Delta offered EMB170's for USAIR minus 5%, ASA and Comair would say no to that.....but I bet Mesa and CHQ would do it. I may be wrong. But, if so, there is something inherently wrong with that. I have heard pilots from these companies with my own two ears say things like, "well, too bad for xxxxx. If they wanted the xxxx jets, they could have bid lower for them!" It is rediculous. My company is not perfect, but the OVERWHELMING attitude here is if xxxx wants to fly xxxxx jets for that rate......LET THEM. WE WONT DO IT. If CHQ and Mesa would take this same attitude, we might not have all these problems.

JMHO

 

[CF34-3B1]

79%,

I agree with that assessment.

I wish certain pilot groups weren't so short sighted and eager to spread the cheeks for a chance at a quick upgrade.

If it really does turn into a bidding war between Mesa and CHQ, I think a lot of us will just walk away and go sell cars and hope maybe SWA or UPS calls.

Even the hookers on Virginia Ave. don't stoop as low as some pilots.

"Hey baby, you want a date?"

"Hey baby, we'll fly your EMB's for ya....."

 

[BoilerUP]

The Airways E170 rates are already below CHQ's 70 seat rates. There will be no paycut at Chautauqua for additional E170 growth.

Please enjoy your CHQ bashing circlejerk. Again.

 

[79%N1]

Whatever Boiler...

That may be true, but your rates are lower across the board. And this enables your company to go out and buy you growth, for which you love. In a perfect world, we would all have the same, or similar rates so we could all not be whipsawed. You CHQ guys would feel exactly the same if Commuter xyz came in and undercut you to get the AA/USAIR/DCI flying you currently do. You would be pi$$ed at that company, and you know it......just like the Eagle, Comair, ASA, Piedmont and Allegheny pilots get pissed at CHQ.

Enjoy your growth!!!!

 

[jaybird]

Here's a question: If DCI put out a RFP for E170s, would CHQ pilots lower the rates to Mesa levels "To get the growth"?


My bet is yes. This is the reason other pilts don't like CHQ and Mesa. Its not the individual pilots, it's the fact that they do vote to accept low rates to "get the growth", thereby undercutting other carriers who won't do that, usually for the mainline carrier that they are OWNED BY. Its a fact that if Delta offered EMB170's for USAIR minus 5%, ASA and Comair would say no to that.....but I bet Mesa and CHQ would do it. I may be wrong. But, if so, there is something inherently wrong with that. I have heard pilots from these companies with my own two ears say things like, "well, too bad for xxxxx. If they wanted the xxxx jets, they could have bid lower for them!" It is rediculous. My company is not perfect, but the OVERWHELMING attitude here is if xxxx wants to fly xxxxx jets for that rate......LET THEM. WE WONT DO IT. If CHQ and Mesa would take this same attitude, we might not have all these problems.

JMHO

Dude your sooo full of $hit.

Which one of you 2 give the reach around? 79%N1 or CF34-3B1?

 

[79%N1]

Your Mom/Wife/Girlfriend is giving me one right now.

Truth hurts, because you know every word is true.....If not, which part do you disagree with????

 

[aewanabe]

Your Mom/Wife/Girlfriend is giving me one right now.

Truth hurts, because you know every word is true.....If not, which part do you disagree with????

Start with the Eagle pilots, because we make more than them. Uh, I know the Mid-Atlantic guys hate us... oh, wait we make more than them, too. (Yeah, they make Eagle rates.) Oops, now it's everyone from the various "wholly-boneds", because they were in the secret meetings between our MEC and MGMT where we "whored ourselves out to steal their flying". **CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED**, you've got so many BS points I can't keep up anymore.

It's always a few of you a@@monkeys spouting the same tired refrain... "oh no, CHQ is coming to take my flying." Yep, and your girlfriend/wife and dog, too.

 

[NDM]

We took our current rates for JOB PROTECTION. You may want to call it growth, but they are one in the same. We negotiated our scope so that we did not fall in line with many of you- fighting with each other owned by the sme company. We took the scope over pay. QOL knowing another company which is owned by the same Holding Company ( a la wholly owned, DCI, NWA Airlink) would not compete against us. We lived to fight another day, much like Delta just did except it was with a 33% PAY RAISE over 5 years. You might not like us for that, but I speak the truth- I was there sitting across the table.

We protected our a$$es, just as ALPA should of done for the last 30 years. If they would have done that, then the people bashing on here would not be so pi$$ed off for working at a regional. They WOULD be flying for a mainline. Please read my post titled "Mainline and Regional Relationships" on the Majors board.

This "race to the bottom" as some have called it was started long before you and I ever probably started flying. It was called scope exceptions. We just happen to be the ones which "reap" the so-called benefits. By the way, it was CHQ who was asked to do Delta flying before and during Comair's strike and we SCREAMED NO!

I posted on another thread asking for ASA and Comair pilots to please post their CASM Cost Breakdown, and hopefully we could compare ACTUAL costs, but I have not seen anyone do that yet. I posted CHQ's CASM's. Let's find out if it is truly Pilot wages or Aircraft costs that make the difference. Put your money where your mouth is.

Dan

 

[bailout]

>>>I posted on another thread asking for ASA and Comair pilots to please post their CASM Cost Breakdown, and hopefully we could compare ACTUAL costs, but I have not seen anyone do that yet. I posted CHQ's CASM's. Let's find out if it is truly Pilot wages or Aircraft costs that make the difference. Put your money where your mouth is.<<

When flying in DCI colors, does CHQ ever use their own service personel? (gate, rampers, etc) Whose rates do you think get affected by paying those people?

 

[NDM]

You will notice I also posted CASM without wages and benefits(including rampers and gate agents).

Dan

 

[FDJ2]

Here's a question: If DCI put out a RFP for E170s, would CHQ pilots lower the rates to Mesa levels "To get the growth"?


My bet is yes. This is the reason other pilts don't like CHQ and Mesa. Its not the individual pilots, it's the fact that they do vote to accept low rates to "get the growth", thereby undercutting other carriers who won't do that
JMHO

79%, first of all the E170 is not allowed to be outsourced since it has a certificated capacity of greater than 70 seats.

Second, why do you think Delta outsources flying to any DCI carriers, quite simply because you will fly it for less. To dump on Chq and Mesa pilots for low balling is a joke, when your growth at DCI is predicated on the lower costs of using DCI portfolio crews over Delta crews. I guess undercutting is just a matter of perspective for you, it's only undercutting when someone else low balls you, but when you lowball mainline pilots it's o.k.

 

[surplus1]

While you're picking on CHQ, don't forget you have "friends" in SLC that have already agreed to fly up to 99-seats for 50-seat pay rates and they also have no union to upset anbody's apple cart. Those folks already did it for growth and they'll do it again.

Here's a question: What do you call a woman that in bed with 3 or 4 different men in different motels on the same day, for money?

 

[jaybird]

Your Mom/Wife/Girlfriend is giving me one right now.

Truth hurts, because you know every word is true.....If not, which part do you disagree with????

Alright zoid, I wasn't employed here for the "vote", I guess by accepting to work here I essentially agree with the contract.

With that, never have I flown with anyone who has said "I'm glad we gave up pay for growth." I have a hard time believing you actually heard anyone say anything along those lines. And, if these people did actually say this, and your so against it, did you go up and say how you feel to them? No, because your a spineless geek who says these things under anonymity.

I challenge any CMR/ASA people to come up to me or one of my crew members in CVG, JFK, LGA, BOS or anywhere and talk to one of us personally. Tell me/us how you feel to our faces, because untill then, when you call me whore here or over ops I have no respect for you.

 

[NDM]

FDJ2

While I agree with the spirit of your last post, I want to correct something. The Delta PWA restricts Wholly Owned Carriers of DCI to aircraft Certificated for 70 seats. However, outside Carriers of DCI are permitted to fly Aircraft Certificated for more than 70 seats for Delta under the PWA provided they are only configured for 70 seats.

Dan

 

[Caveman]

"Second, why do you think Delta outsources flying to any DCI carriers, quite simply because you will fly it for less."

Wrong. DCI flies equipment that DALPA didn't want to fly and excluded from their scope. You guys are still able to fly RJs if you want. All you have to do is agree to do it for a comparable rate. If you had kept the RJ on property at mainline in the first place the rates would probably be higher than they are now.

First DALPA disdainfully refuses to fly an airplane because it doesn't meet the criteria of a 'mainline' aircraft and then they piss and moan about us stealing their flying when we are successful. You had your chance and you took a pass. Deal with it.