Why isn't there a union for the Regionals??

[Gr82Aviate]

The only time government should facilitate commerce is when the potential tax revenues exceed the construction costs. Airlines don't want to increase tax generating capacity. They want to increase frequencies and reduce gauge. There is no upside for system improvements from the government point of view.

The correlation between airtraffic congestion and highway congestion is really quite similar. In both situations increasing the amount of concrete available will likely address the problems. The problem is getting the concrete where people want it. Like PCL says above, nobody wants to go to ISP. They want to go to LGA and they don't have space for more concrete. Likewise, a new interstate across Death Valley would do little ease traffic in the LA basin.

Somehow people seem to accept supply and demand for their ground travel needs. If a certain route is unbearably congested they look for other routes, ride mass transit, carpool, or just don't go. This concept is lost on air travelers though who have the "entitlement" attitude that their $100 ticket should provide them a seemless travel experience.

FWIW: If my memory serves me right the interstate highway system was conceived for the use of the military and to provide jobs to a largely unemployed America. Either way, huge tax revenues have been generated from their construction.

Yeah, and I guess the airlines don't generate huge tax revenues, being one of the highest taxed industries in this country...Jet fuel taxes, landing fees, gate fees, security fees, etc.?

 

[DoinTime]

Yeah, and I guess the airlines don't generate huge tax revenues, being one of the highest taxed industries in this country...Jet fuel taxes, landing fees, gate fees, security fees, etc.?

The bulk of taxes are generated by ticket sales. Like I said earlier though, airlines aren't selling more tickets. They just want more flights in a smaller gauge airplane.

 

[Gr82Aviate]

The bulk of taxes are generated by ticket sales. Like I said earlier though, airlines aren't selling more tickets. They just want more flights in a smaller gauge airplane.

They aren't selling more tickets??? So traffic levels are the same now as they were right after 9/11? Rigghttt!

 

[PCL_128]

They aren't selling more tickets??? So traffic levels are the same now as they were right after 9/11? Rigghttt!

No, but they're about the same as they were right before 9/11, only with lots more smaller airplanes.

 

[rumrnr78]

And where are you going to put these numerous new runways and gates? Been to LGA lately? Not exactly a lot of space. How 'bout DCA? Same problem. MDW? We barely have enough room to clear the houses at the end of the runway on takeoff.

Personally, I'm a big fan of regulation in aviation. The airlines are now the backbone of the national economy. Allowing the airlines to behave in whatever manner they choose and clog up the limited space we have with their ridiculous little RJs that are merely a tool of breaking mainline labor is absurd. I'd love to see a return of the CAB and a completely regulated industry. If the airlines continue with their stupidity, then that's exactly what we'll see happen years down the road when they've completely crippled the transportation system with more and more RJs.

Let's start by not letting pilots buy the right seat!
And, the ones that do, are not allowed to voice their piehole for 10 years. Got the hint pcl?
What a wonderful world it would be...
rum

 

[PCL_128]

Let's start by not letting pilots buy the right seat!
And, the ones that do, are not allowed to voice their piehole for 10 years. Got the hint pcl?
What a wonderful world it would be...
rum

You really should remove that sand from your mangina.

 

[DoinTime]

Let's start by not letting pilots buy the right seat!
And, the ones that do, are not allowed to voice their piehole for 10 years. Got the hint pcl?
What a wonderful world it would be...
rum

You guys that slam on PCL 128 really get off on generalizing him don't you? I bet it makes you feel better about yourselves. Give it a rest.

I can't smile on his method of entering this profession but like most in his ranks back then they didn't know sh*t when they signed up. Unlike many though he learned as he went and now knows more about this business than most veterans.

His selfless contributions to this profession in his first decade are more than the people who discredit him will probably ever achieve. Go figure.

 

[Nevets]

It always pains me to see an ALPA rep defending deregulation. I know you must have read Flying the Line, Vol II at least once. Deregulation is the singular catalyst that has sent this profession down the sh*&er. The sooner we reregulate, the better.

I guess its the libertarian side of me. I just feel the less the government has their fingers on things the better. The government should only regulate aviation safety. Of course there are always exceptions to the rule and I guess Carter and Kennedy didn't think this was an exception.

And yes, I have read Flying the Line I & II.

 

[Nevets]

The only time government should facilitate commerce is when the potential tax revenues exceed the construction costs. Airlines don't want to increase tax generating capacity. They want to increase frequencies and reduce gauge. There is no upside for system improvements from the government point of view.

The correlation between airtraffic congestion and highway congestion is really quite similar. In both situations increasing the amount of concrete available will likely address the problems. The problem is getting the concrete where people want it. Like PCL says above, nobody wants to go to ISP. They want to go to LGA and they don't have space for more concrete. Likewise, a new interstate across Death Valley would do little ease traffic in the LA basin.

Somehow people seem to accept supply and demand for their ground travel needs. If a certain route is unbearably congested they look for other routes, ride mass transit, carpool, or just don't go. This concept is lost on air travelers though who have the "entitlement" attitude that their $100 ticket should provide them a seemless travel experience.

FWIW: If my memory serves me right the interstate highway system was conceived for the use of the military and to provide jobs to a largely unemployed America. Either way, huge tax revenues have been generated from their construction.

You may have a point with revenue versus taxes. But I disagree with your premise that airlines don't want to increase revenue. As for the upside for the government, don't forget that this is a government of the people and for the people.

There is the possibility to increase concrete or utilize the concrete already in existence in places that its needed. People will go to where it makes sense for them to go.

The point is that if commerce demands it, the government should try to facilitate it. You could also use the railroads as another analogy for this.

 

[PCL_128]

I guess its the libertarian side of me. I just feel the less the government has their fingers on things the better.

Normally I would agree. I'm a big fan of free markets in the general sense, but some industries need to be excepted from that rule. The aviation industry is now the backbone of the US and world economies. Without a functioning air transportation system, the entire world economy would collapse, and the US would feel the biggest brunt of it. That was the original intent of regulation and the RLA in the aviation industry. The industry was considered too important to national commerce and national security to allow to be swayed by sometimes-volatile free markets. I think this industry has proven that it's far too volatile to be subject to the whims of a free market. A return of the CAB and full regulation would be a welcome event, as far as I'm concerned.

 

[DoinTime]

I just feel the less the government has their fingers on things the better..

Doesnt this statement contradict this one?

The point is that if commerce demands it, the government should try to facilitate it.

 

[Nevets]

Normally I would agree. I'm a big fan of free markets in the general sense, but some industries need to be excepted from that rule. The aviation industry is now the backbone of the US and world economies. Without a functioning air transportation system, the entire world economy would collapse, and the US would feel the biggest brunt of it. That was the original intent of regulation and the RLA in the aviation industry. The industry was considered too important to national commerce and national security to allow to be swayed by sometimes-volatile free markets. I think this industry has proven that it's far too volatile to be subject to the whims of a free market. A return of the CAB and full regulation would be a welcome event, as far as I'm concerned.

I guess its just a philosophical difference between us. We will just have to agree to disagree.

 

[Nevets]

Doesnt this statement contradict this one?

What I'm trying to say is that, in general, the less the government regulates (other than safety) the better. AND if commerce demands certain infrastructure that would benefit all, the government should not stand in the way of letting that happen whether be it by unregulating or by funding (fully or partially) the infrastructure or in other words, facilitating it.

For example, there are EPA regulations that make it difficult for a company to build a refinery or powerplant (especially in California). If some of those regulations were lifted, companies might actually build one or two for the first time in decades.

 

[Gandalf]

Yeah, that's it, I've never been East of the Mississippi...since I used to fly corporate all over the planet, I think it's safe to say in addition to flying East of the Mississippi, I've more likely than not been a lot of places you haven't!


What I was trying to point out to you was that RJ's are not soley to blame for delays, in fact it's far from the only problem...In addition to the antiquated FAA equipment, and lack of spending on infrastructure, you might want to open your eyes to the world around you and acknowledge the rapid growth of corporate aviation and the huge increase in numbers from fractional operators that were barely a blip on the radar a decade ago!

(Sigh)....Well, Gr8, I think I said that in the first line of the previous posts that there are other reasons for delays...

Yes, corporate aircraft have increased, however they don't use the major airports as much as the airlines. Go to LGA, ORD, ATL, etc. there are a few corporate aircraft that use the airports, however they are going to be more inclined to use the satellite airports. More accessible, cheaper or no landing fees, etc. etc.

Now, go to LGA, ORD, ATL, etc. and look at the numbers of airline traffic. Look at the numbers of rjs taxiing around....As I believe PCL and others have so astutely stated is that there are other considerations when dealing with the airlines....

How about GATE SPACE. The corporate airplanes get to taxi over to Signature, etc. where it is a lot easier to park, and by virtue of the lack of number of aircraft - ramp or parking space is very rarely an issue.

On the airline side, how many gates are there? Especially, how many can be leased from the airport authority for each airline at each airport? Hmmm....That number also contributes to the overall picture of aircraft allowed at an airport.

Now, most airports(major airports) have limited resources in the way of SPACE. They are physically limited by their locations. A lot of the airports in the US have seen the exploding growth of the cities around them. This limits the runway growth and the gate space growth. There are some physical laws that I am sorry to say that even mighty Congress can't overcome.

Also, stated before, the customer in most cases does NOT want to travel out to a satellite airport for air travel. There are some exceptions, LA. Well, the absolutely insane size and scope of the LA area demand that other airports have commercial traffic. But most other cities people want the convience. In PHX, they have been talking for years about Wilie serving as a feeder for PHX. Its perfect...Three 10,000 foot runways, relatively good space around the airport to develop, etc. But, people don't want to go there. MDW....Where are you going to build any more runways? There is a reason that when SWA went off the runway they went into a ROAD. It is called a CITY. There are already 2 major airports in Chicago. Where are you going to go? Go out to RFD for commercial service? There is some limited service, but it is LIMITED for a reason. The customer doesn't want to travel out to RFD for airline service.

Unless you have the land to build an airport such as DEN did, and even now you are starting to see the town grow out to the airport - building more runways at most of the countries airports is very difficult or impossible - unless you want to displace several thousand homeowners from their homes.

So, yes technology IS a problem. Infrastructure IS a problem. Airspace availability IS a problem. However, when looking at the most of the major airports in the US, they all have physical limitations on the amount of physical growth - runways or gate space.

Again, if the number of rjs using the major airports increase with NO real ability for the airports to accomodate them - physical space issues - then the delays are going to get worse. This issue has come to head in the last few years as - surprise - the number of rjs have increased....

Rjs do have a place in the market. They do serve a purpose..and the airline of today can't survive without them....However, limits need to be placed on them.

 

[Gandalf]

The Equation

A + B + C + D = E

If A, B, C are held constant and E increases then D must have increased.

The variables that have been brought up admittedly by others have NOT CHANGED. Thats your arguement.....The improvements in the runways and infrastructure, the useability of the airspace, due mainly to 1960-1970 technology HASN'T changed. AGREED!!!

NOT DISPUTING THAT FACT! NOT DISCOUNTING THE ROLE THAT PLAYS......HOWEVER......

If those things HAVEN'T CHANGED then what has to have changed to cause the delay problems in air travel in 2007.
And not DOT delays caused by crews not triggering on-time - BUT, serious delays in HOURS.

Hmmmm......The technology, infrastructure, etc. was the same in 1990, 2000 (BEFORE 9/11), 2002, 2007.....

Hmmm.....9/11 - Air travel plummets, thousands furloughed, aircraft parked, bankruptcies....

....So, the industry takes a slow road to recovery....

2007 - Pilots are still furloughed, planes are still parked in the desert......

HOWEVER, the MAJOR commercial hubs in the US are seeing astronomical delay problems.....

We have the "Passenger Bill of Rights", etc., etc., etc......

Can the BUSINESS man (remember that he/she is still the reason that we are all here) from Dodge City, KS fly to Toyko direct - NO, he has to go thru a MAJOR HUB..

MAJOR HUB.....Sees an dramatic INCREASE in the NUMBER of aircraft at that airport. No increase in gate availability and runway capacity (some reasons are lack of government oversight, (BUT MOST LIMITS AT MAJOR HUBS ARE PHYSICAL LIMITS)...Are those dramatic increases in aircraft numbers, mainline aircraft?.......No.....Rjs.

So, UNLESS Warren Buffett convinces the world that the NYSE and all associated financial corportate giants should move to Omaha, unless the fashion industry, and other important vital commercial industries and the millions of people that live in and around the NY city area are somehow convinced to move to Nebraska.....THEN PEOPLE ARE GOING TO WANT TO FLY TO NY.

Until the political and governmental center of this country is MOVED to Montana....THEN PEOPLE ARE GOING TO WANT TO FLY TO WASHINGTON, D.C.

Until a Tsunami or earthquake completely and utterly destroys the LA area and it is unable to rebuild ever again,....PEOPLE ARE GOING TO WANT TO FLY TO LA.

Unless Global warming melts enough ice to flood Lake Michigan and wipe out the entire Chicago metro area...THEN PEOPLE ARE GOING TO FLY TO CHICAGO....

Until all of the MAJOR U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES DECIDE COLLECIVELY that instead of flying to the major commercial cities in the US, they would rather fly to South Dakota....THEN PEOPLE ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO FLY TO THE MAJOR HUBS.

Corporate aviation is NOT going to have an appreciable affect on the operations at MAJOR US HUB AIRPORTS, due to the fact it doesn't make financial sense in most cases to fly to those airports...Increasing the airspace availabilty enroute can alleviate SOME delay problems, enhancing the technology at the ATC level can alleviate SOME problems....Adding runways and runway lengths (WHERE YOU CAN) will help...

Again, unless you are willing to uproot thousands of homeowners around the country, move roads, businesses, power lines, sewers, etc. in order to put in a new runway in a MAJOR HUB AIRPORT....

Let alone, re-configuring the airspace due to a new runway.....

AT MOST OF THE MAJOR US HUBS YOU ARE STILL LEFT WITH WHAT YOU HAVE....

So, again...what changed in order to have the delay problems?

WHY DID the problems in infrastructure, technology etc. that HAVE BEEN THERE the last 10, 15, 20 years just BLOW UP in the last 3-4 years after the most devastating blow to the airline industry came in 2001?

The airlines, to their credit, have used the rjs to cut costs, in order to recover financially. GREAT! Thats what we need, a recovery of this industry...

The rj DOES have a place and role in the industry.

However, not realizing the fact that the rjs are increasingly being used at MAJOR US HUB AIRPORTS AT A RECORD NUMBER....blinds us to the reasons.....

WHY THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE OUTDATED ATC SYSTEM, ETC. ETC. ETC. CAN'T HANDLE THE DEMAND......

 

[waveflyer]

There should be a national list for regional pilots --- (and one for major pilots) within ALPA.... otherwise you'll continue to see the race to the bottom and the whipsawing continue to a much greater degree than at the majors.

Funny how Mesa does a ridiculously small amount of United flying- but the threat that Mesa will take over the whole industry is always there??/ Control the masses with the few.

 

[CitationUltra]

Maybe some genius has already thought of this, but why isn't there a Union that represents the regionals?? 110 seats or less, a union that looks out for the little guys??

You could call it RAPA, Regional Airlines Pilots Association. I'm sure someone has already thought of this, so why has it not worked??

just curious??

There was, in fact, just such a union, Regional Airline Pilots Association (RAPA). It represented Wings West Airlines and some other pilots prior to and during their merger and eventual absorption into the American Eagle mess.

 

[CitationUltra]

Because 1.95% of a regional salary isn't going to do much. At least the regionals (arguably) have a voice in ALPA, if a regional union was created I have to think we wouldn't stand a chance against a better funded mainline union.

That's right--you don't. The better-funded union is ALPA.

 

[CitationUltra]

Quote: Originally Posted by DX Rick
No to menton the STL-JFK's. 2.5 hours.
CVG-HOU or CVG- MIA...in a 50 seater....all which mainline should be doing.

We shouldn't be doing anything more than 90 minutes.



Hoover, have you flown lately? How about out of the nations top airports? Been delayed? Hmmmm.....

Well, the reason for the massive increase in the numbers of delayed aircraft and the absolutely ridiculous delay times across the nation are due to the rj's. Plain and Simple.

Do I like flying them? Of course. Am I glad to have a job? You bet.

Sure, there might be money in it for the airlines in doing it this way. But at whose expense?

Mainline pilot salary is down. Regional pilot salaries are a joke - especially now that we ARE flying "mainline" routes.

In the past, regional airlines were looked at by most as a stepping stone to the majors. They still are. However, the numbers of pilots that are staying with their respective companies for a "career" at the regional level has increased. Why not - the instability of the industry has led to that.

However, if a regional airline is to be a place to stay and have a decent career - then the pay and retirement benefits should be competitive to the type of flying and routes flown by other carriers, no matter the type of aircraft flown.

By staying with a regional airline for your career, you are saying that aircraft size doesn't matter (which is Fine-no flame please!), then wouldn't it stand to reason that you would want to maximize your pay and benefits for that career?

There are of course QOL issues that may be better at a regional depending on your situation (money isn't everything), however QOL stuff varies at every company, in fact at every industry. Everyone has a different idea on what QOL things are most important to them.

However, we all generally agree on the amount that "we" should receive for our particular job.....An engineer at Apple and one at Microsoft may have different compensation and benefits, but OVERALL it will not be so different. And it certainly will not be below what is generally agreed on industry wide. Otherwise, for most of us QOL stuff will lose out to compensation.

Would I love to fly an 737? Sure! But NOT AT AN REGIONAL AIRLINE SALARY. That is what this industry is moving towards.

In the past when the regionals were flying mostly t-props and the route segments were short, it was acceptable to pay a pilot lower because they REALLY were "regional". The airlines COULD NOT bring in a 737 to podunk regional airport. But, that has all changed. The places where the airline could not bring in the 73, they can bring in an rj, or 2 or 3 or 4 or 5.....

And while "we" would be remiss in not assisting the companies try to make a profit, there is a point where it has to stop.

You graduate from law school and get an entry level job at a law firm. You expect to get paid a certain salary. After 10 years of experience and after being your firms top lawyer(ie. Captain), you move. You go to a bigger, better firm expecting a salary that reflects your overall experience as a lawyer. Now, at the new firm you may not be handling the top cases until you get experience with that company(ie. First officer).......However, you would NOT expect to get paid what you got when you had just graduated law school.

Because of the way this industry pays its pilots - Having more rjs, rj operators, and rj pilots in the overall system LOWERS THE PAY of everyone. If we were paid based on overall experience then it wouldn't matter as much.

The airlines are posting great load factor numbers. However, the use of rjs has increased. The number of total aircraft in the system has greatly increased. But most importantly those aircraft are able to operate at the nations busiest airports, not mostly at podunk regional as in the past. This has created a huge strain on the system.

So, while some of you think that flying an rj sure does beat that C-172 flying, and it does........

Having an increasing nationwide rj fleet flying longer and longer routes does nothing for this industry......Except expand the egos of some........

You are absolutely right in this very astute economic analysis. The transition to smaller jets is but one piece of a broader array of actions that has irrevocably altered the industry and the flying profession over the past thirty years.

The airline companies have achieved exactly what they wanted out of the changes. Staffing costs have been lowered across the board, and thus seat costs have been marginally lowered, while at the same time the influence of labor unions has been systematically diminished.

They also now have large, cheap regional airline facilities that are being deployed to an ever greater degree on networks that were once the routes of the larger carriers. The nature of these carriers is that they will never allow real substantial professional growth and will never provide a professional salary potential, no matter how much wishful thinking--and talking--is expended on it.

And yes, we could see it coming from the mid-1980s on.

 

[CitationUltra]

Let's start by not letting pilots buy the right seat!
And, the ones that do, are not allowed to voice their piehole for 10 years. Got the hint pcl?
What a wonderful world it would be...
rum

Not letting them? How do you propose to do that?