CLazarus

I've seen some very good points made on various UAL threads about threats to our Scope. I've learned a lot as a result. However, if I wanted to go back and search for a particular post, it would be difficult to find. Hence, I am creating this thread in hopes of it becoming a one stop shop for civilized Scope discussion (oxymoron alert!). I'll throw out some chum in a bit to get things started...

CLazarus

So, no one says they want to relax our current Scope (except perhaps trolls). Many have stated they would give up pay to protect our current Scope (e.g. - if we were forced into concessions to avoid bankruptcy).

Would anyone give up some pay to further tighten our Scope? I expect not but figured I'd ask. I don't honestly know how we could successfully tighten up Scope further than it is right now, does anyone? I'd love to see more 50 seaters put out to pasture, but aside from a NSNB I'm not sure how else we could force management's hand.

I imagine management would love to buy 175 E2s, but I understand they are too heavy under current Scope. So, would it be wise to use the 175 E2 as a bargaining chip to tighten Scope elsewhere? Any thoughts?

DashTrash

I'm not sure of a cost/benefit analysis would produce a substantial benefit by giving up pay? In my mind, Scope is the single most important section of any CBA. Scope=Job. It's that simple! I would love to be able to tighten Scope, but I'm not sure that the cost would be worth it. JH our former MEC Chairman said that we had industry leading Scope language until Delta agreed to their Scope. After that, it was copy and paste.

John Carr

True. They're old, crappy to ride on, etc. And depending on which outsourced vendor is operating it and and their specific W/B program, stupidly weight restricted.

But ask yourself this;

What's the BIGGER threat to the mainline NB pilot's job? The crappy 50 seater serving East Jesus Texas and BFE Louisiana, or wherever else? OR, the 70 seater that's more capacity disciplined/flexible for medium/large cities when mainline feels the need to scale back NB service?

Or asked another way, would you rather see the 70 seaters go away at the regionals, OR the 50?

In a PERFECT WORLD, the 70's would all be at mainline, as well as the 50's. But you can poop in one hand and wish in the other, we're NOT THERE YET on scope recovery.

God forbid a Kirb Stomp comes down the pike.....

webecheck

Easy. Remember the thread discussing how pathetic our cs100 rate is? Chop that rate in half and then we have rates for 76 seaters on par with what our express carriers pay. I'm certain if the union said fine we'll accept those rates to bring all express airplanes on property mgmt would go for it. Probably would make the seat mile cost even cheaper since there isn't a separate corporate structure that has to be paid for and the mainline wouldn't have to worry about quality control.

Who loses in that scenario? How do we staff it? I guess I started this post tongue in cheek, but would it be such a bad thing? Would any FO on property even bid 76 seat CA? If not, why would the pay rate even matter then since everyone would agree having the planes and staffing at the mainline is better for the brand anyway? The RJ capt getting paid 100/hr is still flying our pax anyway so is it better for him to be paid by the mainline or the express flavor of the month?

This post is directed at 50 or 76 seaters only. Not a 100 seater. I'm all for max pay rates, but also for max profit sharing, max job security, max brand protection, and max career expectations. Therefore, what is the right answer to get all planes back?

awax

https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/s...archid=8530158

MiLa

I have to side with John Carr. 50 seaters suck to ride on but if they feed our hubs from tiny towns that can't support any other service, that's not all bad. There definitely needs to be cut-backs in 50 seaters in some areas though. But the 70 seaters are flying 1200-1400 mile routes between major metropolitan areas.... THOSE should be mainline routes. Not sure how we go about getting those back though...

Jaded N Cynical

How about this.......let management buy the planes, and we force the them to comply with agreement in place. This thread is pure negotiating in public which is NEVER a good idea.

Next subject, do you think your wife/ girlfriend or both would cheat on you while you were on a trip? Hows that for a nice public discussion?

Grumble

How about not giving anything? Stop with this mentality of trading one thing for another. I won't pay out of pay rates to bring airplanes on property. Pilots don't buy airplanes. I also won't vote for anything other than tighter scope restrictions.

awax

Yep, This ^ Of course the corollary is to show up at a union meeting and make sure your elected union officers have a firm grasp too.

Are we talking about the wife/GF cheating on you with each other?