Originally Posted by
Free Bird
Johnso
Im trying to understand those who disagree with me in regards to scope. Can you elaborate on that answer? Do you not think that management wants to outsource our jobs? Do you think that if they try for additional outsourcing (bigger RJ"s) on the next contract that DALPA will say no? Why?
Not trying to be a smart a$$, really trying to understand. To me this TA allows more mainline jets to be outsourced, as the 70 + seater should of never been allowed to DCI imo.
FB
I believe it's an overall improvement in scope because we said NO to 82 seat RJs, reduced the total amount of DCI hulls, tightened JV and Codeshare language, and tightened overall language. I'm not concerned about just small scope. I'm worried about all scope. I agree that the 70+ seater should have never been allowed to DCI, but I was not allowed to be part of that decision. Unfortunately, it's gone now.
We as a pilot group aren't getting help from anyone either. We as profession will be lucky if AMR doesn't get their way in BK. They're asking for 255 51-88 seat RJs. APA is willing to give up 308 51-81 seat aircraft in ADDITION to 352 70 seat aircraft. That's not what Delta or NWA gave up in BK. If we call management's bluff, and AMR gets in between what they're asking for and what APA is asking for, how do you think RA's scope proposal will look then? Just food for thought.