Originally Posted by Scoop

GJ,

The answer to your question is simple - Scope improvements will all come via tradeoffs within section 1. Theoretically, Scope will not be sourced as a "bill payer" to fund other contractual improvements. When you consider that Scope covers DCI, Joint Ventures, Code-sharing, alliances and whatever other term you can think of to describe what it actually is........... Outsourcing, it becomes easier to visualize.

So saying Scope will stand on its own does not mean we will hold the line at 255 large RJs at all, it means if you consider all of section 1, it will be improved.

Say for example (hypothetical numbers) that Delta Pilots currently fly 55% of the passengers who buy a Delta ticket. If under the new TA we increase that to 60% or 65% we have improved Scope. Here is the catch, our current Scope is so bad that we can easily allow 50 more large RJs and still improve our Scope.

Scope is my number 1 issue for this TA - without Scope improved payrates hardly make up for an extended stay in the right seat. I am against any more large RJs but that is not the only weakness in our section 1.

The problem is not that we will be selling Scope - Scope has already been taken/sold/traded etc, depending on your interpretation of the last 10 years. Currently our Scope sucks. I hate the fact that while I was furloughed DCI was hiring by the hundreds, but all aspects of section 1 are equally important - what good would recapturing 76 Scope do if we double our code shares and JVs?

I want growth and hiring at Delta. If the best way to do that is tradeoffs within section 1 than so be it.

Finally, my interpretation of "Scope must stand on its own" means that we will not be trading Scope for something other than Scope - say higher pay-rates for example. The problem with this is how do we, the line pilots know what was traded for what, and how things were actually costed behind closed doors etc. I guess we have to trust our Negotiating Commitee and I have no reason not to.

Scoop