Originally Posted by
CALFO
I don't know if this makes it any easier as the company had the rights to do this already.
I think the company's plans to reallocate flying instead of completing a jcba is short sighted and another insult to the pilots (especially the UAL side). The only winners in a reallocation are commuters from opposing hubs. Everyone else, with the exception of wb pilots and Guam crews will be negatively affected by the company's act. I believe the union saw this and did what they could to mitigate damage.
I think it's easier now with both MEC's stamp of approval on it, less likely to cause an uproar in the ranks. As you and others rightly point out, the company could have done this and more anyway, but would have risked more fallout.
IMO, it's telling that UCH wouldn't agree to make
all TPA provisions expire/terminable at JCBA ratification instead of on a future date, assuming ALPA was pushing for that. Maybe their plans don't include a JCBA before, say, next spring. Given that work rules have taken a year and aren't done yet, they could drag out scope and pay for another year. By which time they'll be enjoying synergies out the wazoo and may have even less motivation to get the JCBA deal done, or even to extend the TPA provisions again. I hope I'm wrong, but every time I think it can't get any worse, it does!