Originally Posted by
Mesabah
No you don't get it, Scope is not a contract item; You can't strike over it.
Nobody can make that definitive statement yet. The case law is unclear. There is a non-airline union case where a judge ordered that the union cannot strike over the scope of their work. But a similar such order with a different union was later overturned on appeal. There has not yet been a press to test of this issue in the airline industry.
Originally Posted by
Mesabah
I doubt you would show up to work tomorrow if DCI started receiving 777s/747s/767s, etc.
We'd have no choice but to show up. Our CURRENT scope language allows for the RAH scope abuse through the sham of a "holding company". Some DCI could be made a "holding company" tomorrow and start ordering 777's. Our own union says the language
they wrote is too weak to even attempt a grievance regarding holding companies.
Originally Posted by
Mesabah
Why do you show up if there are CRJs being flown by DCI?
Because our scope allows it. Just like big airplanes in holding companies.
Originally Posted by
Mesabah
I admit I'm guilty of contributing to the slide by working at Pinnacle, but I never took any of your flying that wasn't given.
I appreciate that you at least admit you have a role in this debacle. Most just prefer to blame everything on major pilots.
Originally Posted by
Mesabah
If mainline pilots truly wanted CRJs back on the mainline, management would put them back there, no contract negotiations necessary.
No they wouldn't. Because it's not about finances...it can't be. Delta is willingly operating stuff with higher CASM's rather than bringing it in house. They do it because it's all about the whipsaw. Mainline pilots getting flying back would prevent the whipsaw, therefore your thesis of it mattering if mainline pilots truly wanted CRJ's back is meaningless.
Originally Posted by
Mesabah
However, I've got bad news for you, they don't.
Wrong again. That may have been the case a decade ago, but it's not the case now.
Carl