They could, but they would have to get additional small (read: inefficient) aircraft to do it. There is no economic incentive for additional outsourcing. The opposite is true: there is economic incentive to *decrease* outsourcing right now because the 50s are such a drag. This is evidenced by the extraordinary lengths the company has been willing to go to in order to get out of them (killing Comair, Mesa lawsuit). Lesson learned: the company responds
strongly to economic incentives.
They wouldn't have to get any more small aircaft at DCI. All they have to do is cut mainline and park aging aircraft and voila! Yes they do respond strongly to economic incentives. What do you think they will do if we turn this down and they then spend the money on heavy checks for the 50s? I suspect they will fly them to try and get the money back from doing the checks!
With the TA, you decrease the number of airframes at DCI, somewhat decrease the ASMs at DCI, decrease number of pilots working at DCI, and shift the balance of flying significantly towards mainline. These are all good things! None of us are arguing against them. The problem is by shifting DCI's fleet to one that is economical, capable, and popular with passengers, you are once again creating economic
incentive to outsource. Yes, there are block hour ratios to protect you from the company responding to that incentive. The real money question is: will the company respect the contract? Will ALPA enforce the ratios if tested? Will the language hold up in court? Will the ratios survive the next contract?
You answered your own question better than I could have! That is why the ratio's are there. I will probably be called a "company man" for saying this but I have been proud to work for Delta thru my career so far. Over the years I have been here there has not been alot of head butting between Delta and DALPA. There have been instances where the contract has been violated and DALPA has grieved and won. FM II being one of them. I fully believe DALPA will grieve any known violation of the ratio. Only courts can decide that! I would say yes because our agreement is with Delta Air Lines and not DCI. Will the ratios survive? Only the next TA will tell but I would be highly surprised if they didn't...
These are the real questions because by the end of this contract, if ratified, DCI will be far more attractive than it is now, the company will once again consider them a viable alternative to mainline, there will be 230 76 seaters permanently ensconded at DCI, and a portion of the 102 70 seaters will be getting old. The pressure to allow more outsourcing will be huge, and the precedent will have been set.
It may be more attractive but it will definitely be smaller and isn't that what we are after? I cannot get passed the fact that, currently, DCI can reach 255 76ers if mainline gets to 801 aircraft and then Delta could dump mainline. You say some of the 70s are getting old, I rest my case with the pump and dump to 255 76ers.
Put another way, if there were some way to
guarantee that the "hard caps" and ratios remained in place for the next 15 years, they would be a good deal and worth allowing the extra jumbo RJs. With this T/A though, it's only guaranteed for the next three years (if the company respects the contract) and it ensures there will be pressure for additional outsourcing at some point.
You're trading decent protections for the next three years for a precarious situation in the years after that.
Unfortunately there will never be a guarantee of that. When in contract negotiations, every thing is negotiable. Well thanks for saying we get decent protections from the TA!
All I can say for the last is: You are only worth what you negotiate!