What irony would that be? Truth of the matter is airlines need pilots and they don't necessarily have to be "good." How is good defined? Use checkride failures as a criteria? Job interview success rate? The list could go on and on.
I did read a lot of the transcript. You are making the point for me in regards to Colgan.
What difference does JetU make? It wasn't a PFT organization like Gulfstream was in which you pay to sit in a Beech. JetU was like ALLATPs, CAE, and any other RJ sim company out there. You would come in, pay for sim time and some ground school, and then get only ONE interview out of the program. Nothing was guaranteed. Those hired would go to 9E. This was simply another way to get to a regional. Some choose other routes and there's nothing wrong with any. Once you show up to ground school, no one really cares where you came from. We all have to pass the same interview/background.
In that same way, I don't have to explain myself to you either. I must have missed something, you seemed happy at the MIA Airbus center. Regardless, all things equal, in your shoes, I would have probably done the same thing. You are also correct that JetU is gone and there are (were?) lawsuits. I do not know the status of that. In the same way you look at a pilot for going to JetU, I look at it the same when a guy takes a job at a non-union Colgan which is growing explosively at the expense of a union ALPA 9E in a time when 9E then downgrades/displaces pilots, and Colgan grows with newbies showing up being non-union. Our careers were negatively impacted by that non-union growth which was specifically a union-busting move by 9E Corp. There's a reason why Colgan had the fastest upgrades and massive growth. You can't deny that fact. Phil T played his cards right in terms of non-union Colgan vs union ALPA 9E.
But they did vote yes to USAPA and helped push ALPA out. That's like an Obama voter in 2012 now saying he's embarrassed. It still doesn't change the fact they voted that way.
Yes, of course they are doing okay! Did you not read my post? When legacy 9E was going to Bloch for the arbitrated list, they wanted their class dates to be used as DOH instead of sim date (both XJ and 9L already had class date = DOH). This was disputed first by XJ, and then 9L joined in on the dispute. Fast forward to a couple weeks ago, now with the props gone and the massive displacement coming, legacy 9E wants to get Bloch to clarify the intent of his RJ quota in that no XJ or 9L pilot can be awarded or displaced into a RJ unless 9E maintains 541 CA positions on the CRJ-200. 9E legacy wanted a clarification but all 3 groups need to file for the dispute to be heard by Bloch. Legacy 9E went ahead with it but were met with a NO from 9L and XJ in that they were not willing to join the dispute. Of course, obviously, with all the props gone 9L could face a downgrade for every pilot if Bloch came back with clarification. So now it doesn't go to Bloch because of the stonewall tactics of 9L.
That was my point. Never ever underestimate how your fellow man will screw you to gain for himself. Initially, both XJ and 9L had class dates as DOH and only 9E had sim date as DOH. 9E wanting to adjust the sim date to class date for DOH was industry standard, and what XJ and 9L *already* had. But in their greedy interest for an approx. 1.5-2 month seniority grab, they disputed with Bloch. Now with the tables turned and the props gone, with a potential situation of all 9L CAs getting downgraded, 9L doesn't want to send any dispute to Bloch for clarification. Amazing how that works out, eh?
