Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
miaskies
Posts: 1268
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 3:08 am

Re: Aviation Week: Embraer, Bombardier Delay Larger RJ's, Don't Expect Scope Relief

Sat Mar 11, 2017 3:19 pm

FlyinRabbit88 wrote:
Independence Air / ACA is the reason why..... they got tired of the United shell game that is the regional feed. And they decided to try and go alone..... they got destroyed.. Republic tried it too with E190s, Failed too.....


Incorrect with regards to the YX 190 operations. They were originally intended for Frontier, once they sold off Frontier they had no need for them. They ran them for a while doing charters for Casinos all over the country while they found a new home for them. Post Frontier their focus was A) One carrier = merge Chautauqua, Shuttle American to Republic B) One Fleet = get rid of ERJ, Q400, E190 and be only a E70/E175 carrier.
Crosscheck Complete :)
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 8766
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: Aviation Week: Embraer, Bombardier Delay Larger RJ's, Don't Expect Scope Relief

Sat Mar 11, 2017 3:31 pm

BobPatterson wrote:
It is at least logical that airlines should pay for the training of their new pilots. This could be done through a national air academy program, jointly funded by all airlines (and perhaps also by a military ROTC type program).


You and the OP sound like Franco/Deutsch/Sino communists. Why does the government have to train (or subsidize training) of airline pilots? Why does the government need to tell carriers what aircraft to fly? Why does the government have to abrogate a long-standing right of pilots to union representation and market settlement of pay? Where's the evidence of market failure? - people still fly at historically low fares.

If the pay/training cost model doesn't work, fewer prospective pilots will self-fund and wages will go up. If regional carrier pilot unions want to fund education and training (classes, or hiring bonuses), they're welcome to do that. Regional carrier wages aren't higher, and regional carriers aren't growing rapidly, because mainline pilot agreements are a cap on RJ wage/benefit inflation -- carriers can just fly mainline instead. A decade ago regional carriers were a cap on mainline growth - United retired a bunch of 737s and had regionals do the flying (or shrink ASMs). These are examples of competition and market adjustment. Welcome to the U.S.A.
 
User avatar
BobPatterson
Posts: 3416
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2015 7:18 am

Re: Aviation Week: Embraer, Bombardier Delay Larger RJ's, Don't Expect Scope Relief

Sat Mar 11, 2017 4:23 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
BobPatterson wrote:
It is at least logical that airlines should pay for the training of their new pilots. This could be done through a national air academy program, jointly funded by all airlines (and perhaps also by a military ROTC type program).


You and the OP sound like Franco/Deutsch/Sino communists. Why does the government have to train (or subsidize training) of airline pilots? Why does the government need to tell carriers what aircraft to fly? Why does the government have to abrogate a long-standing right of pilots to union representation and market settlement of pay? Where's the evidence of market failure? - people still fly at historically low fares.

If the pay/training cost model doesn't work, fewer prospective pilots will self-fund and wages will go up. If regional carrier pilot unions want to fund education and training (classes, or hiring bonuses), they're welcome to do that. Regional carrier wages aren't higher, and regional carriers aren't growing rapidly, because mainline pilot agreements are a cap on RJ wage/benefit inflation -- carriers can just fly mainline instead. A decade ago regional carriers were a cap on mainline growth - United retired a bunch of 737s and had regionals do the flying (or shrink ASMs). These are examples of competition and market adjustment. Welcome to the U.S.A.


:-) Thank you, you have made my day :-) I don't need to be welcomed to the USA, I was born here 79 years ago (next month). Color me true blue, America first (in many ways), life-long Conservative Republican (when Conservative really meant conservative). Not a McCarthy-type though, which you kinda sound like.

Heaven forbid, I said nothing about telling airlines what to fly, abrogating union rights or dictating pay scales (although setting minimum pay standards might be a good thing).

Did you notice the parentheses around "(and perhaps also by a military ROTC type program)"? Perhaps? Just a suggestion, might be a cheaper way to train military transport pilots and maintain a healthy reserve component of them.

The evidence of market failure is the supposed pilot shortage (current or projected) in the USA. That could easily be solved with special visas/green cards, but being an America first person, I think we ought to solve the problem using US citizens.

Another evidence of market failure is in the race to the bottom, where stockholders-first, screw-the-passenger mentality brings lower than practical fares at the cost of passenger comfort and the fair treatment of employees (generally speaking, and not by all airlines, nor of all employees).

Intelligent conversation doesn't require inanities such as "You and the OP sound like Franco/Deutsch/Sino communists".

Have a nice day.
Facts are fragile things. Treat them with care. Sources are important. Alternative facts do not exist.
 
User avatar
exunited
Posts: 225
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2015 10:48 pm

Re: Aviation Week: Embraer, Bombardier Delay Larger RJ's, Don't Expect Scope Relief

Sun Mar 12, 2017 1:09 am

Flighty wrote:
exunited wrote:
DCA-ROCguy wrote:
Aviation Week reports that Embraer and Bombardier are delaying new-generation 70-ish seat aircraft due to scope clause seat and weight restrictions. Apparently some of these contracts at US carriers come up in 2018, and the manufacturers don't expect scope relief to allow these aircraft to be built.

http://aviationweek.com/commercial-avia ... 1b738e3ccd

More evidence of how scope clauses hurt consumers and communities, and why they should be eliminated. The 70-110 seat category is extremely important for smaller and mid-size communities, especially as the economics of 50-seaters are less and less sustainable. Newer-technology, more-efficient 70-80 seat RJs could likely help keep more routes sustainable. Airlines should not be obstructed in any way from offering them. If anyone says "let mainline pilots fly them," fine, but they have to do so at rates that do their part to help keep fares and routes economically sustainable. :)

Jim


Sorry Jim, the pendulum has swung to the side of labor for now. Were you lamenting the 50% pay cuts many of us took and loss of pensions etc so OUR flying could be outsourced to the lowest bidder? Please, give it a rest there is no innate right to air service and no right for YOU to decide what is a "fair" price. RJs were a tool to use against mainline employees to keep wages and benefits down and that is all they were meant to do and thanks to the bankruptcy laws, the airlines were able to take more than full advantage of this whip sawing. I am constantly amazed how many members of a so called airline enthusiasts site are so anti airline employee (unless they are willing to work at wages you deem appropriate). Please point me to a university enthusiasts site so I can spout about how university employees are over paid and they should be outsourced so that tuition can be at a level that I feel is appropriate...


YOUR flying? What an attitude to have. I can't even comprehend it. This is your country to live in (I think) otherwise nothing is guaranteed to you at all.

bigb wrote:
The system that isn't broke, the system is doing what is supposed to do just like the way it was set up between management, unions, and consumers. Consumers are still getting good air fares, management are making profits after consolidation, pilots qol and pay are returning back to where they were before the regional industry was used to whipshaw rates down to unsustainable levels.



This is very well said


Yes, OUR flying. When you are performing a job and then it is outsourced to the lowest bidder and now someone else is doing it then they are doing YOUR JOB. Has nothing to do with entitlements, it has to do with the facts of the situation.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 15100
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

Re: Aviation Week: Embraer, Bombardier Delay Larger RJ's, Don't Expect Scope Relief

Mon Mar 13, 2017 1:22 am

Rather than aircraft scope, why not route scope? Any route over x number of seats a week must be flown by mainline? Over an even higher threshold, then a limited number of off peak frequencies could be flown by a 75 seat?

This protects small markets from losing service, protects mainland pilots from a route with 8 RJ flights a day, but still gives the airline the flexibility on a busy route to add a 75 seat flight at 2pm or 10pm or Saturday while maintaining mainland flights in the morning, evening, Sunday etc.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
Varsity1
Posts: 2248
Joined: Mon May 02, 2016 4:55 am

Re: Aviation Week: Embraer, Bombardier Delay Larger RJ's, Don't Expect Scope Relief

Mon Mar 13, 2017 1:38 am

ikramerica wrote:
Rather than aircraft scope, why not route scope? Any route over x number of seats a week must be flown by mainline? Over an even higher threshold, then a limited number of off peak frequencies could be flown by a 75 seat?

This protects small markets from losing service, protects mainland pilots from a route with 8 RJ flights a day, but still gives the airline the flexibility on a busy route to add a 75 seat flight at 2pm or 10pm or Saturday while maintaining mainland flights in the morning, evening, Sunday etc.


Scope should not even be a subject. Outsourced flying needs to end. That way the airline can fly anything they want, anywhere they want.

The difference in wages between mainline and regionals are around $150 a flight hour for an entire crew. As southwest and jetblue have found, it's cheaper to just not play the game at all.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 6714
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Aviation Week: Embraer, Bombardier Delay Larger RJ's, Don't Expect Scope Relief

Mon Mar 13, 2017 2:47 am

The scope clause is a long-established contract feature. Then were simple, "all flying done by XXX will be flown by pilots on the XXX seniority list. When RJs arrived scope was relaxed to allow mainline to contract out routes that could only be economically on RJs.

The regionals cannot fly aircraft larger than that specified under the contract with the mainline. They cannot fly them for another carrier, under their own banner AND continue to operate an RJ fleet for the mainline.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 5106
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: Aviation Week: Embraer, Bombardier Delay Larger RJ's, Don't Expect Scope Relief

Wed Oct 11, 2017 6:17 am

LightningZ71 wrote:
Wouldn't it make more sense to just rework the mainline contract to allow for a separate collectively bargained contract for pilots for those mid size regional birds? Something that offers the protections and benefits that are similar to mainline, but at a different wage scale? Perhaps as something like a feeder system for mainline pilots with provisions for more experienced left seaters to elect to transition to mainline status, but remain as a sort of advisory training pilot for new hires?

What is the scope clause trying to prevent that this won't address?



It would make sense for the Regional Airlines to go BACK to the way it was before all of this "Branded Express" flying when regionals flew under their OWN colors and had their OWN staffs and kept and arms distance relationship with the majors. Airlines who had their own routes ala Golden Gate, Golden West, Ransome, Mississippi valley, Henson, Suburban, Air Wisconsin, PBA, Aspen. Rocky Mountain, Britt, Altair, Etc.
 
r2rho
Posts: 3096
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:13 pm

Re: Aviation Week: Embraer, Bombardier Delay Larger RJ's, Don't Expect Scope Relief

Wed Oct 11, 2017 11:15 am

Rather than aircraft scope, why not route scope? Any route over x number of seats a week must be flown by mainline? Over an even higher threshold, then a limited number of off peak frequencies could be flown by a 75 seat?

That's actually an interesting proposal. Fixing scope at some arbitrary MTOW is out of line with the evolution of aircraft. And the days of manufacturers developing a/c exclusively for the US market are over. I'm not saying scope should be relaxed, but it should be flexibilized, and this could be one way to it.
 
N757ST
Posts: 1038
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 6:00 am

Re: Aviation Week: Embraer, Bombardier Delay Larger RJ's, Don't Expect Scope Relief

Wed Oct 11, 2017 11:16 am

BobPatterson wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
BobPatterson wrote:
It is at least logical that airlines should pay for the training of their new pilots. This could be done through a national air academy program, jointly funded by all airlines (and perhaps also by a military ROTC type program).


You and the OP sound like Franco/Deutsch/Sino communists. Why does the government have to train (or subsidize training) of airline pilots? Why does the government need to tell carriers what aircraft to fly? Why does the government have to abrogate a long-standing right of pilots to union representation and market settlement of pay? Where's the evidence of market failure? - people still fly at historically low fares.

If the pay/training cost model doesn't work, fewer prospective pilots will self-fund and wages will go up. If regional carrier pilot unions want to fund education and training (classes, or hiring bonuses), they're welcome to do that. Regional carrier wages aren't higher, and regional carriers aren't growing rapidly, because mainline pilot agreements are a cap on RJ wage/benefit inflation -- carriers can just fly mainline instead. A decade ago regional carriers were a cap on mainline growth - United retired a bunch of 737s and had regionals do the flying (or shrink ASMs). These are examples of competition and market adjustment. Welcome to the U.S.A.


:-) Thank you, you have made my day :-) I don't need to be welcomed to the USA, I was born here 79 years ago (next month). Color me true blue, America first (in many ways), life-long Conservative Republican (when Conservative really meant conservative). Not a McCarthy-type though, which you kinda sound like.

Heaven forbid, I said nothing about telling airlines what to fly, abrogating union rights or dictating pay scales (although setting minimum pay standards might be a good thing).

Did you notice the parentheses around "(and perhaps also by a military ROTC type program)"? Perhaps? Just a suggestion, might be a cheaper way to train military transport pilots and maintain a healthy reserve component of them.

The evidence of market failure is the supposed pilot shortage (current or projected) in the USA. That could easily be solved with special visas/green cards, but being an America first person, I think we ought to solve the problem using US citizens.

Another evidence of market failure is in the race to the bottom, where stockholders-first, screw-the-passenger mentality brings lower than practical fares at the cost of passenger comfort and the fair treatment of employees (generally speaking, and not by all airlines, nor of all employees).

Intelligent conversation doesn't require inanities such as "You and the OP sound like Franco/Deutsch/Sino communists".

Have a nice day.


Bob, as a fellow moderate conservative i can appreciate that you usually bring a reasonable argument into most topics. Here though, you are simply off base.

I’m going to preface this with the disclosure that yes, I am a pilot with a major airline.

Bob- as a conservative, why do you believe that government should set prices? Shouldn’t the market do that? The airlines should be no more regulated on the price front then Best Buy or Walmart. These companies are free to set any price they want... if Walmart wants to get into a price showdown with Target, so be it. Same is true with Jetblue and Southwest, or Delta and United.

Green cards for pilots... ok man. I think you don’t have a grasp on the WORLD market for pilots. There aren’t enough pilots anywhere to fill the cockpits in the coming years. Why? The low pay that has plagued the industry for years. We are finally at a point where salaries are likely to add an influx of pilots into the workforce. I can go to Asia tomorrow and make 300+ k a year on a commuting contract. Just like previous posters have stated... doctors lawyers etc pay their dues for years, but the end game exists.... a high salary. That high salary was diminished for the dark period of the 2000s. Hiring was also nil, as the regionals siphoned off mainline ASMs. People wanting larger regional fleets should take a note of caution, such action could lead to LESS available airfares.

I’m not going to launch into a tirade about how being a pilot is stressful or a giant responsibility. Honestly, usually our job has a long time of absolute boredom and occasional fleeting moments of stress. What we are though is group of skilled and highly trained professionals that have the added bonus of being away for countless days from our loved ones. That, added with unionism and shortage of supply, has put us all in an advantageous position to negociate QOL and Pay commiserate with what we believe we should earn. To set a government regulation on that is to dis-avow your basic conservative principles.
 
N757ST
Posts: 1038
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 6:00 am

Re: Aviation Week: Embraer, Bombardier Delay Larger RJ's, Don't Expect Scope Relief

Wed Oct 11, 2017 11:23 am

Also Bob, if you believe lower wages will suddenly lead to lower airfare, think again. The airlines are the most profitable in their history in spite of the current pilot wages. By lowering wages you generate less pilots entering the workforce, which means less flights, higher airfares, but much higher airline profits. I guess that’s good if you are a shareholder, but it won’t be good for the public.
 
mikejepp
Posts: 219
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2008 11:47 pm

Re: Aviation Week: Embraer, Bombardier Delay Larger RJ's, Don't Expect Scope Relief

Wed Oct 11, 2017 12:02 pm

r2rho wrote:
Rather than aircraft scope, why not route scope? Any route over x number of seats a week must be flown by mainline? Over an even higher threshold, then a limited number of off peak frequencies could be flown by a 75 seat?

That's actually an interesting proposal. Fixing scope at some arbitrary MTOW is out of line with the evolution of aircraft. And the days of manufacturers developing a/c exclusively for the US market are over. I'm not saying scope should be relaxed, but it should be flexibilized, and this could be one way to it.


That won't happen. Any increase in the ability of airlines to outsource jobs will be fought by unions. No matter what form you put it in. You say, oh the route is only 300 seats a day and can be outsourced? Next thing you know, you LAX-SYD on a 777 is being flown by Republic.

Unions have wised up to the games and tricks management plays and are now of the mindset that if it is going to be flown, it will be flown by mainline. Relaxation of scope simply isn't an option and will not be considered. Management knows unions are serious to the point where CEOs are even admitting it will not be brought to the negotiating table.

It is management's fault that they trashed the airline pilot profession so badly that nobody wants to be a pilot anymore and now theres a shortage. This is their doing. Because of that, pilots now finally have some small bit of control over their destiny in contract negotiations as opposed to the past where airline management, at their will, destroyed careers left and right for the sake of profits.

It is Embraer, Bombardier, and Mitsubishi's fault that they designed airplanes that they designed mainline sized airplanes and tried to call them "Regional Jets". They didn't do their homework and it simply isn't going to work for them.

The E175E2 can fly 80 passengers 2000+nm and it is the smallest "new" offering they have. This is a mainline airplane being marketed as a "Regional Jet" and that flawed thinking has got them into a position that doesn't make any sense. If they wanted to be in the RJ market, they should've designed a new 50 seater. Or a new prop. But they didn't. If that is because these types of airplanes are no longer profitable, that doesn't signal that even more gives and concessions are needed from pilots (by airlines making billions), it is a signal that the regional jet / outsourced / contractor business plan no longer works.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10446
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Aviation Week: Embraer, Bombardier Delay Larger RJ's, Don't Expect Scope Relief

Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:27 pm

strfyr51 wrote:
It would make sense for the Regional Airlines to go BACK to the way it was before all of this "Branded Express" flying when regionals flew under their OWN colors and had their OWN staffs and kept and arms distance relationship with the majors. Airlines who had their own routes ala Golden Gate, Golden West, Ransome, Mississippi valley, Henson, Suburban, Air Wisconsin, PBA, Aspen. Rocky Mountain, Britt, Altair, Etc.

As a supporter of "true Regionals" it would probably be a better point of discussion on A.Net if the question was asked why the Regional Airline industry / profession died. How were mainline carriers with more expensive equipment - larger jets and no turbo-props - able to run regional out of business, if they dumped capacity with same fares they lost money, where were the shareholders? It started with airlines within an airline to lower cost - Song, Ted, etc - when they did not work they looked at the then regional's. A short term strategy that worked, now the long term effects are showing up. The regional's and cargo carriers were where newbie pilots started their professions allowing them to build hours and gain experience, this along with the vast military industry created a feeder system for pilots.
The mainline management killed the regional's and the end of the cold war and the budget issues have greatly reduced the military option, the issue today is the mainline management don't seem to think that they played a major part in creating the problem.
If not for the current POTUS I am still in shock that we have not seen much more push to allow more foreign pilots in under some kind of visa program where the mainline carrier can defer or pay them a different wage due to their foreign status. Reality is they do not care who flies the a/c as long as they pay what they want to and make what they want to. JV's are a start and if pilots had not fought back, DL raking in their profits will see a greater push for their expansion, after all, they can show that it makes money and the pilots jobs have not been lost.

Interesting discussion, I don't see it as a distraction since the USA working environment is where they are building these larger a/c to serve, and let's not talk about protectionism, the USA probably operates more Airbus a/c than anyone else.
Last edited by par13del on Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
bennett123
Posts: 10372
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 12:49 am

Re: Aviation Week: Embraer, Bombardier Delay Larger RJ's, Don't Expect Scope Relief

Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:34 pm

IMO, pilot pay will always be affected by aircraft size.

The revenue capacity of a CRJ will always be less than a WB.

Also if CRJ become too expensive then people will not fly.

In that case, you lose the CRJ flight with no corresponding increase in mainline.

The issue is will pilots accept a B scale, as an alternative to regional flying.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos