The Few.....The Not so Proud.... Yes Voter
02-06-2018, 09:49 AM
#121
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2017
Position: NK CA
Posts: 840
5. What changes did we make in code sharing protection?
The present CBA protects the pilot group from furloughs as a result of code sharing. Under the tentative agreement neither code sharing nor any other form of marketing agreements can result in furloughs or a reduction in scheduled system wide block hours. This new metric is measured on a year over year basis in comparison to each trailing twelve month period beginning with date of signing. This means that if the carrier is adding flying, as is now the case, the block hour floor relating to code sharing is automatically raised. This provision also prohibits Spirit from entering into joint ventures or revenue sharing agreements in which Spirit pilots do not participate in the flying.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The present CBA protects the pilot group from furloughs as a result of code sharing. Under the tentative agreement neither code sharing nor any other form of marketing agreements can result in furloughs or a reduction in scheduled system wide block hours. This new metric is measured on a year over year basis in comparison to each trailing twelve month period beginning with date of signing. This means that if the carrier is adding flying, as is now the case, the block hour floor relating to code sharing is automatically raised. This provision also prohibits Spirit from entering into joint ventures or revenue sharing agreements in which Spirit pilots do not participate in the flying.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
02-06-2018, 09:55 AM
#124
On Reserve
Joined APC: Feb 2018
Posts: 23
5. What changes did we make in code sharing protection?
The present CBA protects the pilot group from furloughs as a result of code sharing. Under the tentative agreement neither code sharing nor any other form of marketing agreements can result in furloughs or a reduction in scheduled system wide block hours. This new metric is measured on a year over year basis in comparison to each trailing twelve month period beginning with date of signing. This means that if the carrier is adding flying, as is now the case, the block hour floor relating to code sharing is automatically raised. This provision also prohibits Spirit from entering into joint ventures or revenue sharing agreements in which Spirit pilots do not participate in the flying.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The present CBA protects the pilot group from furloughs as a result of code sharing. Under the tentative agreement neither code sharing nor any other form of marketing agreements can result in furloughs or a reduction in scheduled system wide block hours. This new metric is measured on a year over year basis in comparison to each trailing twelve month period beginning with date of signing. This means that if the carrier is adding flying, as is now the case, the block hour floor relating to code sharing is automatically raised. This provision also prohibits Spirit from entering into joint ventures or revenue sharing agreements in which Spirit pilots do not participate in the flying.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Its true they can not furlough you but your schedule can drop to 72 hours and no more. Opportunities for upgrade can disappear as more flying goes to other less expensive operators.
02-06-2018, 09:58 AM
#125
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2015
Posts: 110
Let me draw your attention to section 1 4 E. That 12 month look back does not apply if spirit code shares with a company only operating regional equipment. Think MESA. It also does not apply to foriegn carriers operated/owned by spirit. In short they can give MESA as much of your flying as they want.
Its true they can not furlough you but your schedule can drop to 72 hours and no more. Opportunities for upgrade can disappear as more flying goes to other less expensive operators.
Its true they can not furlough you but your schedule can drop to 72 hours and no more. Opportunities for upgrade can disappear as more flying goes to other less expensive operators.
Of airplanes 88,000lbs or less. EMB 170 or CRJ 700. Just quit, read any other CBA scope section. This scope protects our job, isn’t that a good thing?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
02-06-2018, 10:00 AM
#126
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2017
Position: NK CA
Posts: 840
Let me draw your attention to section 1 4 E. That 12 month look back does not apply if spirit code shares with a company only operating regional equipment. Think MESA. It also does not apply to foriegn carriers operated/owned by spirit. In short they can give MESA as much of your flying as they want.
Its true they can not furlough you but your schedule can drop to 72 hours and no more. Opportunities for upgrade can disappear as more flying goes to other less expensive operators.
Its true they can not furlough you but your schedule can drop to 72 hours and no more. Opportunities for upgrade can disappear as more flying goes to other less expensive operators.
“Does our Scope clause protect us from having regional airlines doing Spirit flying? I’ve heard that SkyWest and Trans States have the Mitsubishi MRJ on order with no customer.
No other carrier, regional, or otherwise can do Spirit’s flying, except if Spirit contracts out to have it performed. Such contracting would be subject to the time limits and circumstances in Section 1.B.2. Spirit could, perhaps, code share with a regional carrier using the MRJ. However, in a typical code share agreement the carrier doing the flying keeps 99% of the revenue and, as with contracting out, there is no reason for Spirit to give up revenue from a profitable route just to have a regional carrier perform it using equipment with less seating capacity. Fee for service arrangements would be even more impractical because Spirit would not only be losing much of the revenue from the flying, they would be paying to have another carrier do flying Spirit that could do profitably, or for passenger feed – something Spirit has never done and which would make no sense.
Finally, Spirit could acquire a regional carrier that used Mitsubishi aircraft. However, the Mitsubishi (at 88,000 pounds) is above the weight limits for regional aircraft as defined in Section 1.BL of the TA and, therefore, any growth in flying performed by a carrier using the Mitsubishi would have to be accompanied by comparable growth in Spirit flying.“
02-06-2018, 10:03 AM
#127
On Reserve
Joined APC: Feb 2018
Posts: 23
SMH wrong again.
“Does our Scope clause protect us from having regional airlines doing Spirit flying? I’ve heard that SkyWest and Trans States have the Mitsubishi MRJ on order with no customer.
No other carrier, regional, or otherwise can do Spirit’s flying, except if Spirit contracts out to have it performed. Such contracting would be subject to the time limits and circumstances in Section 1.B.2. Spirit could, perhaps, code share with a regional carrier using the MRJ. However, in a typical code share agreement the carrier doing the flying keeps 99% of the revenue and, as with contracting out, there is no reason for Spirit to give up revenue from a profitable route just to have a regional carrier perform it using equipment with less seating capacity. Fee for service arrangements would be even more impractical because Spirit would not only be losing much of the revenue from the flying, they would be paying to have another carrier do flying Spirit that could do profitably, or for passenger feed – something Spirit has never done and which would make no sense.
Finally, Spirit could acquire a regional carrier that used Mitsubishi aircraft. However, the Mitsubishi (at 88,000 pounds) is above the weight limits for regional aircraft as defined in Section 1.BL of the TA and, therefore, any growth in flying performed by a carrier using the Mitsubishi would have to be accompanied by comparable growth in Spirit flying.“
“Does our Scope clause protect us from having regional airlines doing Spirit flying? I’ve heard that SkyWest and Trans States have the Mitsubishi MRJ on order with no customer.
No other carrier, regional, or otherwise can do Spirit’s flying, except if Spirit contracts out to have it performed. Such contracting would be subject to the time limits and circumstances in Section 1.B.2. Spirit could, perhaps, code share with a regional carrier using the MRJ. However, in a typical code share agreement the carrier doing the flying keeps 99% of the revenue and, as with contracting out, there is no reason for Spirit to give up revenue from a profitable route just to have a regional carrier perform it using equipment with less seating capacity. Fee for service arrangements would be even more impractical because Spirit would not only be losing much of the revenue from the flying, they would be paying to have another carrier do flying Spirit that could do profitably, or for passenger feed – something Spirit has never done and which would make no sense.
Finally, Spirit could acquire a regional carrier that used Mitsubishi aircraft. However, the Mitsubishi (at 88,000 pounds) is above the weight limits for regional aircraft as defined in Section 1.BL of the TA and, therefore, any growth in flying performed by a carrier using the Mitsubishi would have to be accompanied by comparable growth in Spirit flying.“
02-06-2018, 10:06 AM
#128
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2017
Position: NK CA
Posts: 840
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
