I plead ignorance compared to some on this subject as my airline doesn't allow RJ express flying in our name, but..... I saw this in the Dec. issue of Air Transport World.
Trans States has ordered in large numbers of the new 78 and 92 seat MRJ.
Here is what their CEO said:
"He is keenly aware that an aircraft with more than 70 seats would violate scope clauses in the labor agreements between major airlines and their pilots unions.
He is hopeful there will be relaxations in scope that will enable mainline carriers to take advantage of the economics of larger RJ's.
During the 2001-04 crisis most US Airlines were able to to achieve a bit of leeway with their pilots on this issue, but not nearly as much as analysts had expected, and 70-75 seats remain the de-facto line in the sand for aircraft flown by regional partners.
Trans States has ordered in large numbers of the new 78 and 92 seat MRJ.
Here is what their CEO said:
"He is keenly aware that an aircraft with more than 70 seats would violate scope clauses in the labor agreements between major airlines and their pilots unions.
He is hopeful there will be relaxations in scope that will enable mainline carriers to take advantage of the economics of larger RJ's.
During the 2001-04 crisis most US Airlines were able to to achieve a bit of leeway with their pilots on this issue, but not nearly as much as analysts had expected, and 70-75 seats remain the de-facto line in the sand for aircraft flown by regional partners.
Last edited:
