Originally Posted by
bigbusdriver
8 seats in a Gulfstream that flys on call sometimes vs an all NBA Aribus they pay for year round is really the one nitnoid we're going to focus on in scope? What sports team has 8 players golfers who already charter.
I'm definitely not just focusing on this nitnoid regarding scope. As I specifically stated, this is yet
another symptom of a
larger problem. To me, it is all related.
For me it is also a credibility issue. We were told that scope was not for sale. Then they gave this away.
5. DPJ has a cap now on a handful of aircraft. Were you really going to bid a 135 lifestyle? If you think DPJ is going to take over all Charters then let's cap how many planes they can have.
How about we allow
zero of that size instead of allowing them a "cap." End the problem before it even has a
chance to start.
History proves how scope creeps. So yes, let's cap the number of planes of that size to -zero- (which would mean not allowing the concession in this ta) and let DBJ management deal with the problem and fix. Why should we "subsidize" their operation with a concession in our contract. That way, there is no concern of our charter flights ending up elsewhere.
And the issue isn't us bidding into a 135 lifestyle. It is the potential of our "lifestyle" of flying being transferred down the road into that 135 lifestyle.
Did anybody here that thought "it's only 50 seat flying" back in the day envision what DCI has become today, doing over 50% of our domestic flying?? Let's stop any scope give up, regardless of what it is, now, so that 10 years from now we're not saying: "I remember when we used to do xxx flights."