Flytolive

There is some truth to that, but how management sees it is not how an arbitrator will. If the APA makes a proposal in line with the DAL and UAL pilot contracts with the same scope then the APA will win the arbitration (remember not a negotiation).

If the terms of the arbitration are no cost increase then adjust accordingly + inflation, but give nothing on scope. Then get the $ in 2016 after DAL pilots takes a swing at it.

Route66

At one time I DID care about scope. I even stood on the same ground you did...at ONE TIME. But that was a time when US Airways and American didn't have wholy owned airlines or code sharing agreements. That was negotiated away years ago. Now it's really just nothing more than an echo of buyers remorse. Look, you say the majority of pilots have NO PRICE for scope. Well see about that but I simply say the numbers will prove you wrong...in the long run. Just like it did with scope (whatever is left of it).

If I HAD my druthers, if EVERY SINGLE PILOT AT EVERY SINGLE CARRIER would COMMIT to voting in contracts that they would hire ALL commuter pilots by their ORIGINAL DATE OF HIRE if they were offered the position to mainline (with the option of deferring with their own knowledge that they would get bypassed on their seniority if they didn't take the offer) I would be the FIRST to STAND IN LINE AND SUPPORT IT.

In the REAL WORLD the reasons Comair and Envoy are getting what they got or ARE getting is that pilots are bidding to top the other guys. If things aren't so great here at the mainline why in God's green earth are you still here?

You guys sound like you had it better at the commuter! So what the heck are you doing here?

Saabs

Route66

I assure you I am a Captain on the LUS side.

Saabs

eaglefly

I didn't say the majority of pilots have no price for scope. Some do, but for others there IS a price. I think the majority who do have a price for scope though, think this offer falls short. The APA counter just MAY not demand complete ignorance of any scope alterations, BTW. My point is that scope (like it or not) IS considered a bargaining chip. That doesn't mean it's automatically used, but doesn't mean it won't. As I said before, I'm not that concerned about scope and any misguided need Parker has for loading up NOW on 70-seat jets. If they're ostensibly going to be placed at regionals, I'll have a lot of laughs watching Parker make that work. I don't see scope relaxation as any win for him as the present number of airframes is destined to shrink considerably and adding seats to those fewer airframes will be a Pyrrhic victory in the long run for him in both the emptyness of the payoff and the bridges he burned to get that empty payoff.

The old "commuter" wasn't a bad gig, but it ran its course. Too many wanted to turn it into an upgrade mill at all costs and that we agree. Management loved it (and obviously Parker still does, although DAL and UAL see the future), but now the inevitable by-product of that philosophy had come home to roost and few want to make huge time and financial investment for a crap existence and murky promises.

Just about the time this proposal's duration arrives, this same philosophy will come home to roost at the legacies and then Parker (or the poor sap who inherits that disaster) will be screwed. That day WILL come and if I'm even still in this so-called profession, I'm confident I'll watch his pleas will be met with shrugged shoulders and best wishes.

eaglefly

How unfortunate for East pilots.

Spoiler

Let me ask the question: which is more onerous to Scope, the 5 seats or the latest proposal???
Have any of our number crunching types ferreted that out?

eaglefly

The scope committee has and has made realistic scope comparisons with Delta and United to determine exactly what industry average scope is and where the initial proposal put us.

Spoiler

But since they got blindsided with this last proposal - did they make the comparison? granted this may be an unknown