Originally Posted by
Bucking Bar
Seriously guys, don't we think the mainline fleet is going to > 790 if the 717 / MD90 / 737's arrive and the replacement of 757's is "leisurely" ? If so, management has their 76 seaters under current language. By 2015 management will certainly be on their way to getting those airplanes while retiring some of the oldest CRJ700's (which are not the Next Gen aircraft).
If not provided with contractual relief then I (and others) expect the CRj 200's to hang around until they hit their required heavy checks, which should come due about 10 to 12 years after they were placed in service. Some of those airplanes were still coming as late as 2006 / 2007 on orders placed in 2004.
My question is not whether this contract is everything I want. My question is whether this contract gets us closer to what we collectively want to achieve in the reduction of outsourcing.
Am I looking at this incorrectly?
Bar;
In a one dimensional way, single metric way, this TA reduces outsourcing. The problem, as I see it, is that it further throws open the door with outsourcing of an economically viable (mainline in every way) airplane.
You have been the loudest and clearest educator on the economics of the 76 seaters. I actually LIKE to commute on them. When I get in one, it is a nice NON-regional jet.
That guage plane does not affect me (personally) anymore. Heck, the 717 doesn't really affect me anymore.
I am a no vote out of a personal moral obligation to hold my ground on my belief that the outsourcing stops with me, right here, right now.
I realize I am only one vote, but all the "perspectives" in the world can't change that, for me.
In many ways, the council 20 chairman's letter echoed most of my own thoughts on this TA overall. I was VERY surprised when I read it...pleasantly.