Originally Posted by
grasshopper
Think the scope will be altered? Pay slashed or sent back with regard to overall you can't have what you want?
My money is on a long term status quo with both sides seriously revisiting the question in about 2015, which is probably not a bad time to be negotiating.
In other words ... exactly what ALPA's kinda been saying to expect.
The 717 just isn't that good an airplane when put in a battle against airplanes which are three generations newer.
It works if we really are expanding capacity into RJ markets and the CRJ900's are really expanding into CRJ200 markets.
HOWEVER, if we are shrinking and displacing to the 717 from the 757 while the CRJ900's take old MD88 flying, then that's an entirely different story.
Originally Posted by
NuGuy
The questions are:
1) Why wasn't a TA negotiated that had sufficient SHORT TERM BACKSTOPS?
2) If the economy is deflating, and the TA is a worse situation from staffing and scope, is it too late to hop off the train?
Nu
Answers:
(1) Arguably it was. There are no furlough protections and ratios which we do not have now.
(2) The vote is still ahead of us. So no, it is not "too late." The question is, do we want to step off the train? If this "train" gets you closer to your intended destination (higher pay, industry standard for reserves, sick, vacation, etc ...) then might as well be on board.
I, along with many others, have been trying to evaluate this TA on the basis of Section 1 above all else. If we are continuing capacity reductions, THEN I think
we might be better off forcing management to put the CRJ900 equivalent at mainline.
On the flip side, there is nothing (and probably less) keeping Delta from reducing mainline capacity under our current contract.
Again, I'm undecided. This has been the most difficult contract evaluation I've ever pondered.