To further the "brow beating".....
You continue to omit the elephant in the room....Aircraft SIZE. The ONLY part your correct on, a CR7, and B757 BOTH require the same amount of Pilots, TWO.

A real "case-n-point" using YOUR RULES/Rational:
UCH's will/does fly B757's (200-300s) from IAH-AUS....The same segment that SkyWest/Colgan planes fly inconcert outside of Mainline Segments. If we use ONLY B.H. Ratio, and omit the airframe size on outsourced iron, what stops SkyWest from flying that same B757 at "cut-rate" wages in place of Mainline B757's Crews/Pay? That small B.H. Ratio of :45 is the ONLY item figured into SCOPE equation, but per your rules/world, Airframe Size is NOT a factor in the SCOPE protection. If size is NOT a player, what prevents this on the SCOPE Scale that you advocate??

To make it a bit more clear, I guarentee you that a majority of L-UA/CO Pilots will NOT settle on only B.H. Ratio/Size. You can also count on those Mainline Pilots advocating no "Hub/Hub", Stage Length Limits, Outsourced RJ size/weight/ect.....and a whole gaggle of JV/Foreign Protections.

I would bet that you have read several of the DAL Threads dealing with their potential TA. In doing so, may have noticed one DAL-Pilot inparticular...."Carl Spackler". In reading what he wrote after consulting with a legal firm on SCOPE vs REgaining Outsourced Flying (paraphrasing):
Mainline Pilot Groups have a heck of a hard time reviving lost/outsourced flying, and having a legal leg to stand on in doing so is tough at best. Once the Mainline conceeds the flying, their legal recourse to revive/recover is slim to none.....In that case, the line is drawn HERE.

With the above being the case, and L-UA already loosing the B-737 flying to "RJ" galore, don't expect ANY concessions/or turning a blind eye to "Airframe Size". If Jeffery/Freddy/Howey want BIGGER, they got it.....It will be on OUR PAYSCALES and RULES while Mainline flys them.

Don't know about other carrier's current/potential TA's, but in our case, SECTION 1 "IS" the JCBA.