Some years ago I flew regularly between 2 EU capitol cities. The a/c was a >130 seater jet. The price was e.g 100. One day I had to fly from a regional airport to my capitol destination: the same distance. The price was 175. I queried this. How could it be that a 50 seat turbo prop from a region was costing me more than a medium jet with a major from a major hub? The answer was "you are paying for transport from one country to another: x-nm. The means is irrelevant. And only 50 people are paying for it, not >130. We are an independent airline" Ah ha. If the pilots want similar pay then the ticket price has to rise; if the host airline wants the ticket price to stay the same then the costs/salaries have to fall. The idea was that the price of transport from X - Y had a value. The cost base had to match that price. The skill involved by the workers and their value was not a factor. Their salary had to balance with the cost. Hence, in the majors, the cost of business class/1st class subsidises cattle class. The regional turbo prop did not have business class.
What should happen is that the regionals should be within the host airline's business package. The regional is operating on behalf of the major and perhaps as a feeder. Thus the host should subsidise the dependant baby and allow correct salaries, not use slave labour at sweat shop rates to maximise its profits. The overall company makes a reasonable profit and the workers get a fair deal. The pax/customer also gets a reliable product of known quality. The host company would be responsible for standards and the pax would be confident of those standards. I've sat next to pax who bought a ticker with XYZ major to then be 'shocked' and boarding a tiny a/c with an unknown operator, but still having paid the normal major's price.
It is that which has to stop. The majors are hiving off their business to not only a lower cost base, but perhaps a lower standards base. The pax are being screwed as are the crews and all employees.