Quote:
Originally posted by b737gearboy
Thats the funny thing about it, if mgmt wants unlimited rj's on mainline they can have them tomorrow and there is even a payscale in our contract. But as we all know they would rather pay peanut wages and benefits to the commuters. As for an about face, some might think it is beneath them to fly a small regional jet.
|
Wow, I didn't realize that there already was a pay scale accomodation for RJ pilots flying for the mainline. Every news article I've seen thus far likes to blame the lack of RJs at USAirways (or any other airline for that matter) on either the scope clauses or resistance from the mainline pilots. I seem to remember one
Aviation Week article where Boy Wonder Gangwal stated that to get RJs in the mainline "big concessions" would be needed from ALPA. I always figured it was a pay issue, but now I see what you're saying- the concessions if I understand this right are that they want to give RJ pilots MUCH less than what the pay scales provide for, right?
It sounds then, that the mainline pilots want the RJ pilots to make more than what management will provide. Is that a fair assessment? Because if so, the vocal protests of some RJ pilots I hear (and the RJ Coalition or whatever that group's exact name is) sound pretty ridiculous.
So it sounds like management gets around this by assigning RJ routes to RJ pilots with the regional affiliates since they'll pay/offer less than what those same pilots would make flying the same RJ for the mainline. So is that where the scope clause comes in? It seems to me that the scope clause would be a pointless argument if RJ pilots flew for the mainline.
And yes, I do know several mainline pilots who look down on RJs as "beneath them".
I've been fascinated by this given American's pilot union and their recent proposal to fold in American Eagle's RJ operations into the mainline.