Exclusive: No change in Scope Clause in new United pilot contract that would have allowed E175-E2

By Scott Hamilton

June 24, 2022, (c) Leeham News: There is no change to the Scope Clause in the new United Airlines pilot contract governing the number of regional jets that can be operated by regional partners, LNA confirms.

There is also no change in the weight of the aircraft allowed, a blow to Embraer’s hopes for the E175-E2. The E2 is heavier than the E175-E1, which entered service in 2004. Embraer designed the E2 to be used with the Pratt & Whitney GTF engine. The GTF is more economical than the E1’s GE CF34, quieter, and emits fewer emissions. But it is slightly heavier than the Scope Clause contracts permit. The USA is virtually the only market for the E175-E2.

Embraer halted E175-E2 testing

Embraer completed a prototype E2, but the flight testing program was put on ice during the COVID pandemic and the entry into service was reset from 2021 to 2027 because Scope wasn’t likely to change. And it wasn’t at United. United was the first carrier to negotiate a new agreement with pilots. American Airlines also negotiated a new agreement, following UAL. There were no changes to Scope weights, either. UAL’s union, ALPA, only today confirmed no change to its contract. It is now highly unlikely Delta Air Lines or Alaska Airlines, whose pilots are also represented by ALPA, will change.

Refusal to allow the E2 to be operated by regional carriers is a major blow to Embraer. It’s also a blow to the green movement. Embraer has been forced to keep the E175-E1 in production for the US market. While the E2 is environmentally preferred to the E1, United’s Master Executive Council of the union says the Boeing 737 MAX is preferred to the E2 as a better choice for a more environmentally preferred airplane. (The MAX is also operated by mainline United pilots, the union’s preferred choice.)

Embraer’s E195-E2, which can carry a maximum of 144 passengers, and the E190-E2 (up to 110 passengers) don’t qualify under Scope for regional operators. The E190-E2 has few sales. Embraer struggles to sell the E195-E2 in competition with the Airbus A220.

61 Comments on “Exclusive: No change in Scope Clause in new United pilot contract that would have allowed E175-E2

  1. I would objectively calculate the environmental impact flying on with the E1 instead of a gradual replacement by the E2.

    Let the numbers be checked by independent specialists/ institutions and send them to ALPA. With US newspapers in the cc.

    So every pilot can explain his/her family & friends. And discuss within ALPA.

    • Just another example of how most climate arm waving is “green for thee but not for me”: Nantucket homeowners don’t want to see offshore wind turbines, Maine “environmentalists” won’t allow a hydro power line from Quebec, Oregonians fighting lithium mines, homeowners associations banning “unsightly” solar panels, San Franciscans rejecting denser housing so service workers instead have long commutes from the hot Central Valley where air conditioning required, etc, etc, etc…

      And I’d guess the UAL pilot union would say “if United wants the environmental benefits of the E175-E2 they can fly the jet at mainline“.

      • The pilot unions arent ‘waving their climate arms’ . As you can see its more about jobs and they dont want those to disappear

        Regional is mostly a misnomer in the US context anyway, as these types of planes are mostly used for flights from the hub cities to substantial cities with 0.5 mill and up urban area population. They could replace 2 RJ flights with one larger plane but for some reasons the US majors like to compete mostly on frequency.
        Southwest and other budget airlines dont bother with the ‘faux regional’ classification and use their standard planes

        • Duke:

          The statement from the pilots was that the MAX is greener than the E2.

          They do not fly the same routes to its all BS. ALPA could let a one to one replacement of the E1 for the E2.

          Is it the end of the world, no. It is a case of green-washing.

      • When did pilot union become a group of “greenies”?? Many love trucks and are climate change skeptics.

        • Pedro:

          Is that not true of the population in General? The reason the EU has no trucks is the high cost of fuel. Otherwise you would have a group running trucks there too.

          Climate change skeptics come from all walks of life.

          And yes I do have a pickup truck. I won’t buy one again but it served its duty for hunting, fishing and camping and did it well for us at the time and is a solid 2nd vehicle as needed.

          Having served at a facility with pilot stationed and having see the parked vehicles in their designated area , they ranged from trucks to econo cars.

          They were no where near all Pickups blowing coal (never saw one out of the pilot lot doing that)

          • Price of petrol in Germany, typical of Europe:
            Litre Gallon
            EUR 1.894 7.170
            USD 1.991 7.537
            Current price of petrol in USA
            Litre Gallon
            USD 1.37 5.996
            So the price of fuel in the US is only 65% that of Germany/Europe but worth noting that US GDP/capita is about 25% higher than say Germany or Sweden. Americans are richer and can afford more.

          • @william – you are making the flawed assumption that GDP/Capita has any relation to Salary/Capita.

            US compensation for non-executive workers has been largely stagnant to declining for 40 years. Factory workers earn less in real terms today than they did in the ’70s. service industry workers make much less. knowledge workers have mostly been flat.

            certain niche jobs have seen increases, but in general unless you are an executive, compensation has not kept pace with inflation, much less GDP growth since “the Reagan Revolution”.

            meanwhile our health insurance, transportation, rent and food costs have generally exceeded inflation, with fuel costs being the lone bright spot for us human beings.

          • “The reason the EU has no trucks is the high cost of fuel.”

            No…the reason the EU has no trucks (i.e. pickups) is that they’re a hillybilly concept that never caught on in the EU.
            Instead, the EU uses vans and SUVs.

            The EU also doesn’t have tuktuks or jeepneys.

          • @bilbo, I didn’t make a mistake. Americans in general have a higher average income than Europeans. The Raw Data for the US and Germany I give below is typical of Europe:
            Average Income in Europ:
            USA:
            Bottom 50% $14,500
            Top 10% $246,,800
            Top 1% $1,018,700
            Germany:
            Bottom 50% 15,200
            Top 10% 148,000
            Top 1% 509,800
            UK:
            Bottom 50% 13300
            Top 10% 116,000
            Top 1% 413,900
            I would suggest the bottom 50% in the US have cheaper clothing, cars and goods. Income inequality in the US is high but its not due to poverty in the US but due to a preponderance of high income earners. The bottom 50% have higher incomes than most of the western world and lower costs for goods and services. Yes I understand there is no universal healthcare for those between 18 and 65 but I am talking about the ability to purchase fuel.
            The bottom 50% have a high income in Swedden. That is due in part to the plentifull resouces of Swedden compared to say UK/Germany.

          • -> Cycling is a common mode of transport in the Netherlands, with 36% of Dutch people listing the bicycle as their most frequent way of getting around on a typical day

            In NYC, like London, many workers commute to work by rail.

          • Well for those who failed to look under the carpet:

            -> In the past three decades, the number of Americans who are on disability has skyrocketed. The rise has come even as medical advances have allowed many more people to remain on the job, and new laws have banned workplace discrimination against the disabled. Every month, 14 million people now get a disability check from the government.

            The federal government spends more money each year on cash payments for disabled former workers than it spends on food stamps and welfare combined. Yet people relying on disability payments are often overlooked in discussions of the social safety net. The vast majority of people on federal disability do not work. Yet because they are not technically part of the labor force, they are not counted among the unemployed.

            In other words, people on disability don’t show up in any of the places we usually look to see how the economy is doing. But the story of these programs — who goes on them, and why, and what happens after that — is, to a large extent, the story of the U.S. economy. It’s the story not only of an aging workforce, but also of a hidden, increasingly expensive safety net.

            -> In Hale County, Alabama, nearly 1 in 4 working-age adults is on disability.[

            -> “That’s a kind of ugly secret of the American labor market,” David Autor, an economist at MIT, told me. “Part of the reason our unemployment rates have been low, until recently, is that a lot of people who would have trouble finding jobs are on a different program.”
            Part of the rise in the number of people on disability is simply driven by the fact that the workforce is getting older, and older people tend to have more health problems.
            But disability has also become a de facto welfare program for people without a lot of education or job skills.

            https://apps.npr.org/unfit-for-work/

          • -> Climate change skeptics come from all walks of life.

            Do that include our most prolific commentator here? 🙄

  2. Can this (recurring) Scope issue not be rendered moot by new legislation?

    • @Bryce

      Good question. Simple answer is absolutely not. Union contracts in the US are sacred (and I think in the EU as well). Congress doesn’t want to piss off their hand to mouth.
      My son is a commercial pilot (Frontier) and says most line pilots think this is a ridiculous rule. Here we are struggling with pilot staffing and then disabled with limited scope clause. Stupid.
      I worked as an airline mechanic one time in my career and we didn’t haven’t have size limitations. 😊 but then, US certified mechanics are not type rated as EASA mechanics are.

      • I would be far more concerned about Airbus getting into bed with the Chinese dictatorship than telling American Unions what to do.

        • Not too long ago, we had a US president who was *very* chummy with the Russian dictatorship…and those days might be back soon…

          • Bryce:

            Off topic, at some risk from Scott I think its worth the EU poster in understanding the US system (and yes it can be bad)

            its a mistake to co-join the US President with what the US Citizens believe.

            Sadly one of the quirks (or worse) of our constitution is that it was intended for people of power not everyone (very limited voting rights to property owner and money).

            As a result we have a thing called an Electoral College and you can get more electoral delegates than popular vote (he lost by 3 million as I recall). That is unusual but the past 3 republican presidents (or terms) have been decided by fewer votes for the Electoral Collage winner.

            More or less Red States have sway on a close vote as they have two Senators that count in the Electoral Collage.

            A States delegates are not split, so my vote does not count if I vote for a progressive.

            Equally there are rules in the US Senate that stop votes of the majority. The idea was to maintain stability but its also meant the loss of change.

            I can only be as good a citizen as I can be treating people as equally as possible knowing I am imperfect in that regard (granted I was a perfect Engineer but I can only blame FedEx for the title).

            I actually hired on as an HVAC expert but I had extensive background in power generation and swithgear and most of HVAC is electrically controlled so unless you over-haul AC compressors, you become a de-facto journey level electrician. But I digress.

            I also specialized in electronics (different field) and their repair. I love talking hole theory and electron movement and that is a whole other area that the PHD’s don’t agree on so my aspect was to just find the failed electronic component and replace it (you can’t repair a transistor, resister, diode, SCR etc).

          • @TW
            More totally irrelevant and convoluted waffle, which in no way substantively addresses the post to which it was directed.
            It’s bad enough that you — randomly — bring up the subject of foreign dicatorships in the middle of this Scope discussion, but it’s even worse that you then can’t conduct a meaningful discourse on the matter.

          • @scott – I know politics are generally off the menu, so please feel free to delete. I am going to stay away from any specific politics or persons in this post.

            @TW – re the electoral college – the voter power imbalance is quite extreme.

            a voter in Wyoming, a state who’s total population would not equate to a single congressman in a larger state (~330M US poulation, 758K per congressman, 576k people in Wyoming) they get 2 senators, 1 congressman and 3 electoral votes, or 1 vote per 192k people.

            a voter in California, a state with 39.2M people gets 54 votes, equates to 1 electoral vote per 725k people.

            that means a Wyoming resident is 3.7 times more powerful on a per capita basis in a presidential election.

            they are 1.3x more powerful in the house of representatives.

            In the senate they are a whopping 68 times more powerful.

            The politics of the senate are dominated by low population and heavily rural states where the power per voter at the federal level is massively higher and the population trends more “conservative”. there is also massive gerrymandering in states like Texas where, by population demographics, they should be close to 50/50 in representation, but are in fact 78% republican with 2 republican senators. (“blue states” also gerrymander their districts but, historically, not as thoroughly)

          • What has U.S’s election system anything to do with Bryce’s post??

            @tw

            When was the last time foreign policy was an election issue after the Vietnam War?

            Did Nixon run on peace talk and withdrawal from Vietnam?? Hell no. Voters vote according to whatever lies they want to believe from professional liars? What a shame.

        • VERY good point. It almost feels like the EU and US are trying to push Embraer into the hands of the Chinese. OTOH, how dumb was Embraer to engineer the E2 overweight hoping for a sclerotic US organization to change is rules?

          • It wasn’t so much Embraer being dumb — 80% of the increase in OEW is down to the GTF engines. More down to PW then. Emb tailored new wings for each of the E2 variants, and yet if the E175-E2 was to be almost the same cabin / fuselage as the E1, there was no way they could find to shave-off 4-5 tonnes of weight.
            And that is of course similar across the like-for-like single-aisle products re-engined with GTFs or LEAPs. The only difference is that none of the others were as bound by SC limitations as the sub-100-seat RJs.

            One move that Emb did do which may have inadvertently extended the appeal of the E175-E1 was when they launched the Enhanced (or ‘+’) variant in 2014, as that improved fuelburn by approx. 6.5% vs. baseline E175 and therefore closed the gap with the E2.
            But if not for that, BBD would have continued to beat Emb on price with the CRJs for years to come.

          • @GM

            I respectfully beg to differ;

            Scope clauses limit pax at 76 and MTOW at 86,000 lbs

            The E-170/175 had MTOW’s of 85,100 & 89,000 lbs

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embraer_E-Jet_family#Specifications

            The engine they had was the GE-CF-348E which weighed 2,600 lbs.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Electric_CF34#Specifications

            The E2-175 has an MTOW of 98,800 lbs.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embraer_E-Jet_E2_family#Specifications

            The engine is the PW1700G which weighs 3,800 lbs.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pratt_%26_Whitney_PW1000G#Specifications

            That’s 1,200 lbs difference in engine weight.

            The difference in MTOW is almost 11,000 lbs between the E-175 and the E2-175. They didn’t see fit to make an E2-170.

            Sure, perhaps the wings needed beefing up – but 11,000 lbs? Of which you claim that 8,800 lbs is due to the engines.

            I’m no aeronautical engineer, but at what point in time did someone ask the question (because you know somebody did and was over-ruled) “Hey – what happens if airlines don’t change scope? What do we do then?”

            To which someone said, “Nah, it’ll be fine…”

            Or was it just ego, as they saw Bombardier launch the C-Series and they figured they wanted to play in that sandbox, as well?

            Sorry – but someone in mgmt made a bad decision, hence they have an aircraft with zero orders and no future (E2-175) and the other models have a grand total of 221 aircraft ordered.

            On a side note:

            There is a thought process that says that Boeing missed out on inexpensive engineering power, when they pulled out of the JV with Embraer. I wonder if they also had a closer look at the E2 line and saw that there was no future in it, as well.

  3. The E2 version is also slightly longer even with the same passenger limit. The indroduction of economy plus with more legroom meant an airframe stretch was desirable for the scope compliant planes.

    Ive wondered if it would be better for airlines and unions to come up with a second scope passenger limit/weight around 90 seats ?

    • Duke:

      Unions do not care, at least in the US.

      Having been in 3, its all about control and the control is all about the HQ and throwing red meat at the base. The dream is to move to a cushy job you don’t have to work at in HQ.

      Its why the US auto industry got to where it did, after excess money then you go after work conditions and in the end you have one guy holding a bolt, another guy puts on the washer and the next guy puts on the nut and then they replace everyone with two other guys, one who holds the bolt head with a wrench and the other to torque it down.

      And if you think that is an exaggeration (which it is slightly).

      Up on the Pipeline they had a turreted crane that lowered a torpedo looking device into the vertical pipe support pipes that put expansions in the pipe to keep it from heaving gout of the ground via Frost heaves, aka a rink shank nail (two vertical with a cross bar in between the pipe laid on).

      We are talking about as small a mobile turret crane as you can get (5 ton pick maybe)

      So, because its a turreted crane, it has to have an operator and an oiler (oiler being an apprentice aka operator in training). Now back in the day, yes you needed full time oiler’s, machinery took constant servicing. Even back in 1976, you greased them once a week (for that use) and fueled them once a day and checked the oil level (which was done by a service truck).

      So, just to start you have two people one of who is doing nothing (well he relieves the operator when he gets exhausted from moving the lever back and forth).

      But wait, there is more.

      Anything to do with pipes is a Pipefitter (798 Union in this case) job (not a regular plumber, this is pipeline grade and the only pipeline grade union is the 798 out of Tulsa Oklahoma, or it was in those days)

      So, to operated the hydraulically that expansion the bands on the torpedo like device, that has to be done by a 798 Journeyman.

      Oh woe, what to do.

      Well, to keep everyone from rebelling, they cut a hole in turret crane3 cab, run an exte4nsion from that lever outside, get a couch from Fairbanks and mount it on the outside of the cab (with a hydraulic so the 798 guy can see the 3000 lbs of pressure it needs)

      So he sits there, the crane operator drops the torpedo into the pipe, when its at the right level he signals to the guy on the couch and the guy on the couch pulls his lever until he sees 3000 lbs, releases the lever, when its at zero he signals the operator who pulls it out of the pipe who drives to the next one to repeat.

      Now it does not end there, all Journeymen are assigned a Hepper (helper if you are not from Oklahoma, those guys were not exactly educated if you know what I mean).

      So when the 798 gets exhausted moving his lever, his hepper takes over.

      4 people paid doing a job that is not even a challenges for one guy (having run turret cranes its not exactly rocket science)

  4. So how soon does Embraer have before it goes the way of Bombardier?

    As well, is there now a market for an OEM to step in and make a cheap, fuel efficient, 2027 compliant RJ for the US market, that meets scope clauses? There must be a couple of thousand reginal jets that will need replacing, no? Surely someone can make a buck on it – now that the ground rules have been set.

    • Embraer makes larger versions of its E/E2 series

      Whats happening is the US cope compliant planes arent viable for manufacturers
      The closest was Mitsubishi Spacejet but thats on ‘pause’ for its development and certification. It was more designed around the 75-95 seats and with GTF engines, while the E series was a designed as a bigger plane that was shortened for the scope market.
      The rest of the world just sees a 85 -95 seater jet as normal for regional type routes that cant take the bigger single aisle ( or uses around 70
      seater turboprops)

      This was written in happier times for MRJ
      https://leehamnews.com/2019/06/13/how-mitsubishi-aircraft-morphed-the-mrj70-into-the-m100-spacejet/

      • Both Embraer and Mitsubishi drank the coolaid that the scope clause was going away or would be adjusted.

        I said at the time they were both nuts.

        That is what happens when you are a foreign mfg thinking you understand a different markets.

        Mitsubishi is permanently paused and Embraer is bound and determines so far to repeat the mistake with the Turbo Prop that is going to fail.

        • I think you’re underestimating our Brazilians my yankee friend. Embraer executives know what they’re doing.

          • “Embraer executives know what they’re doing.”

            Begs the question then;

            Why didn’t they make a scope compliant aircraft? Surely an executive who knew what he was doing, would make 100% sure that your aircraft would have a market to be sold to – no?

            You can blame everyone and everything as reasons for why scope didn’t change, but at the end of the day – it’s on the OEM to make sure their aircraft are allowed to fly.

  5. The scope clauses says jets, how about Embraers prop versions? Since it is not jets there is no limitation and the US Airlines can orde volumes and tell the airlines flying the E1’s to fly the E2P’s for them.

    • I am still looking at it but I believe it says just Aircraft. There are various individual aspects to the scope aspect.

      Horizon is the only one in the US operating a significant number of Turbo Prop aircraft as far as I know. That is a weird relationship with AK Airlines.

      But there is no market for Turbo Prop in the US and that means its limited around the world to some discreet markets.

      Horizon is shifting to E-175 E1 (why E1 I am not sure as I do not think AK Airlines has a scope clause but again Horizon is a weird off shoot I am not sure anyone understands)

      • ‘The pilots want work rules in line with those at other major airlines that allow more flexibility in scheduling their flights and also provide job security by imposing so-called “scope clause” restrictions on who can fly the airline’s larger jets.’
        https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/alaska-air-group-turns-its-first-quarterly-profit-since-2019/
        It seems its something Alaska airline pilots want in their contract
        the E175 ( E1 version is still in production) might suit some of the intra Alaska routes

      • Discreet markets??? What’s about ATR? Because the new Embraer’s turbo prop must replace part of them.

      • Yes, when checking it does not specify jets, just aircrafts and MTOW’s. It will be hard for Embraer to get traction with a turboprop unless fuel prices explode. Another problem are lack of pilots as they are quickly picked up by the major airlines until one pilot ops are approved for regular passenger jets.

    • UA’s pilot contract makes no differentiation between jet and prop under scope. The only thing not limited is 37-seat planes, the Dash 8-200.

      50 seaters are limited, just barely, without regard to being jet or prop.

  6. Scott:

    Alaska Airlines does not have a scope clause to the best of my understanding?

  7. The scope clauses sound like an absolutely stupid construct. I think that Unions are absolutely important to keep the power balance somewhat leveled but there must be a better way to handle this.

    • Walter:

      Sadly in the US Unions are about power not what is good for even the membership.

      The Union books should be open as should the bid process (if you are in a construction entity) but they are not. I was a member of the Teamsters on the pipeline and it was yes sir, no sir and three bags full sir. At best you got blacklisted, at worst people wound up dead. If you were smart you kept your head down (I kept my head down).

      We had one mandatory meeting so that the Union Boss could tell us we could have liquor in the camp. Mandatory meant drum out if you did not attend. I was sicker than the proverbial dog but I drug myself down (with help) just to hear that.

      Equally we formed a Union at FedEx and got a change of management at the top and they dumped us. They knew going in we would cost them money but the guy in charge at the time wanted to grow the union and that was how. We would get a better contract and we would help others (its how it should work). They fudged charges on our guy and removed him (he had enough HP to keep his membership). They broke all sorts of rules and regs and dumped us.

      So hoping or sanity from a US union is futile. The last strike at Boeing proved that though I am not sure there was any dealing with McNenearny, they could have waited him out.

      How good or well trained the Everett Unions are I don’t know. What I saw even in what we thought was a well run union (Electrical) was that a few knew what they were doing and the rest just did what they were told by the few that knew and most of it was grunt work so it worked out. The few that really knew specialized in controls like I did (from a different direction). Most of the Journeymen just knew how to pull wires and some could not even bend pipe.

    • @ Walter Faber
      Union membership in de EU has been decreasing for years, and is now only a fraction of what it once was. There are a few pockets of higher membership here and there, but the general trend is downward. It makes sense: there are other constructs “to keep the power balance” without resorting to outdated Victorian concepts.
      When “union antics” start producing ridiculous constructs, it’s time for the legislature to intervene.

  8. US union membership peaked in 1954
    ‘Union membership had been declining in the US since 1954, and since 1967, as union membership rates decreased, middle class incomes shrank correspondingly.’
    Hardly victorian era , when the strongest period was from 1930s-1950s.

    As Boeing has taken on unions , so has their product quality declined. Its no secret the 787 quality problems almost all grew out of the non union Charleston plant. The unionised Everett 787 line had better quality and a shorter final assembly time at the production peak.
    Unions arent just coal mines and steel furnaces. For the US police unions are some of the strongest and most protective of their members

    • Unions in the UK were legalized in 1871 — right in the middle of Queen Victoria’s reign. The concept can therefore most certainly be qualified as “Victorian”.

      As I said above, there are very satisfactory alternatives to unions in EU countries — where employees generally enjoy much better rights than in the USA.
      With regard to Charleston, BA gets what it pays for: if it chooses to treat workers like cattle, it needn’t be surprised when they produce a commensurate work quality.

      • The first flight by the Wright Bros occurred in 1903. Almost 120 years ago so heavier than air flight must be dismissed as an ‘ancient concept’

        EU countries still have unions exactly like US
        this is from last week
        ‘We at A.P. Moller – Maersk would like to inform you of a confirmed 24-hour workforce strike across German terminals, after the latest round of CLA negotiations between trade union ver.di and the Central Association of German Seaport Companies (ZDS) failed to reach a successful conclusion’
        and last month
        ‘German union IG Metall is calling for steel industry workers to hold a warning strike after employers did not meet its request for a permanent wage increase in a second round of talks.’

        German Unions striking , not such a victorian concept

        • The US and EU unions work differently. It is more of a battle in the US for short term gains than working together for common goals of long term happy employees, customers, suppliers and owners.

        • @DoU

          More reading difficulties.

          I didn’t say that the EU had no unions left: I said:
          “Union membership in de EU has been decreasing for years, and is now only a fraction of what it once was. There are a few pockets of higher membership here and there, but the general trend is downward.”

          A modern EU company like ASML has 17,000 employees, but virtually zero union membership. It uses a works council to keep relations with its employees smooth.

          Younger employees in particular have little appetite to associate themselves with vestiges of the Victorian era.

          • I never said that EU have no unions. That’s one of your usual methods of making up claims.
            I showed examples of German unions having strike action , just like they do in US.

          • In Western Europe (Benelux, Scandinavia, Germany, Austria) it seems over the last 40 yrs the advantages for employers & employees of openly discussing & reaching agreement on reasonable compromises mostly prevented escalations, strikes. Maybe less so in UK & France.. although UK seems less strikes then 30-40 yrs ago.

          • BA, Ryanair and EasyJet all had strikes in recent days.

  9. Unions are only trying to protect some higher paid wages and restricting the entrance of new and younger pilots to the US market. Scope clause and the 1500h limit is a joke, that I believe will drive developments of technologies to remove them from the cockpit. This will come sooner than later.
    Sometimes unions are against the workers they represent, and this is not different.

      • Which both pilots had more than 1500h of experience. There is no lobbying there. Right.

        • -> The co-pilot in February’s U.S. airline crash in upstate New York complained to the flight’s captain that she felt ill and would have skipped the flight but did not want to pay for a hotel room, according to a new cockpit voice recorder transcript released Monday. The extended transcript, released by the National Transportation Safety Board, shows pilot Marvin Renslow commiserated with co-pilot Rebecca Shaw, but did not suggest she pull out of the flight.

          -> Shaw also complained about poor treatment by Colgan Air Inc. which operated the flight for Continental Airlines. She said she earned only $15,800 the previous year and the airline was refusing to give her $200 in back pay she felt she was owed.

          https://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/transcript-shows-crash-pilots-talked-illness-low-pay-1.420342?cache=?clipId=104062

          https://www.google.com/amp/s/abcnews.go.com/amp/Blotter/pilot-fatigue-crash-pads-threaten-safety-airline-passengers/story%3fid=12874949

          -> In the past 20 years, more than two dozen accidents and more than 250 fatalities have been linked to pilot fatigue, according to the NTSB. There have been near misses, like a Mesa Airlines flight from Honolulu destined for Hilo, Hawaii, with 40 passengers and three crew aboard on Feb. 13, 2008, nearly a year to the day before the Continental 3407 crash. The plane flew past its destination without landing and headed out over the Pacific. The NTSB found that both pilots had fallen asleep and did not respond to calls from controllers for 18 minutes.

          The ABC News report comes two years after the crash in Buffalo of Continental Connection flight 3407, operated by Colgan Air, that killed 50 people. *The pilot of the plane, who commuted to his Newark base from Florida, had spent the night before sleeping in a crew lounge at Newark airport*, raising concerns about the role of fatigue with safety investigators at the National Transportation Safety Board. The *co-pilot had commuted to work on overnight flights from Seattle and also tried to sleep in the crew lounge, unable to afford a hotel room*.

          • ‘earned only $15,800 the previous year and the airline was refusing to give her $200 in back pay she felt she was owed.’

            $15,800?

            That’s Walmart greeter money. $300 a week. $7.50 an hour.

            For those in here who want to bash unions – here is a prime example of where things would go, without them.

            You want the guys up front being paid that kind of money, to haul around hundreds of pax in millions of dollars of aircraft?

  10. To those of you bashing unions, because of scope – I offer this:

    How would pilots be treated without representation? How are pilots treated at the feeder airlines? The Colgan Air crash (which got the 1500hr rules put in place) had nothing to do with 1500 hrs, as both have over that amount – and everything to do with pilot rest.

    What do corporations/executives do with profits? Give it back to hard working employees? Or give out dividends and share buybacks to investors and themselves?

    Anyone remember what happened after the initial Max crash, when US based pilots got together and begged Boeing for changes? When they said “WTF is this MCAS and why weren’t we told about it?” What about when the second crash happened?

    Did airlines say “Hang on a sec, we’re gonna push pause on our Max operations and not fly the aircraft, until this gets sorted out”?

    Of course not. Profits before anything else.

    http://www.cpreview.org/blog/2021/8/when-is-enough-enough-how-covid-19-exposed-the-airline-industrys-obsession-with-stock-buybacks

    When Is Enough Enough?: How COVID-19 Exposed the Airline Industry’s Obsession with Stock Buybacks

    “For the past ten years, major airline companies – including American, Delta, United, and Southwest – have used a whopping 96% of their cash flows on stock buybacks

    According to Business Insider, American Airlines spent more on buybacks ($12.9 billion) from 2014 to 2020 than on employee salaries and benefits in 2019 ($12.6 billion). Delta spent the same amount of money in stock buybacks from 2014 to 2020 as they did to pay for all of their employees’ salaries and benefits in 2019.

    Even at the individual level, wages for the median pilot decreased by almost 10% from 2000 to 2012, while stock buybacks were steadily on the rise.”

    Let me point this out to all of you, in case you missed it:

    “wages for the median pilot decreased by almost 10% from 2000 to 2012, while stock buybacks were steadily on the rise”

    So please, tell me again, how the poor corporations are so hard done by their pilots and the draconian scope clause…

    • Great comment, Frank. I’m interested in knowing more about these “other constructs” that
      can protect the Many better than unions can.

      Union Yes!

      • Are unions perfect? No. But they are necessary, plain and simple.

      • @ Bill7
        The “other constructs” are Works Councils, as alluded to above. They work well in the EU, where workers have more rights than in the US. As a results of those rights, there’s more of an attitude of “we’re all in this together”.

        Exceptions are sectors with low-skill labor, and sectors where workers feel that they can easily highjack society (ATC, teachers, pilots,…): those sectors prefer the heavy-handed options offered by unions.

  11. Farnborough is happening in a few weeks;

    Embraer is bringing both the E2-190 & 195, the ‘Profit Hunter’.

    Anyone else think a re-branding is in order, here?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.