Originally Posted by
forgot to bid
If the company said we don't want any more than 715 mainline jets but we want more 76 seaters, the TA gives them that. It tosses the mainline growth requirement and allows a 70 airframe increase in 76 seaters. It is now their option to grow the mainline fleet or use 717s as replacement aircraft.
And we said no worries on parking 70 seaters, keep them and we'll move the cap on jumbo RJ DCI fleet from 255 to 325.
In exchange:
- we get 717s that are probably coming anyways unless Gary Kelly has lost his mind,
- we cap DCI at 450/325 in 2016 when DCI would’ve been 478/255 if no CR2/E45 contracts were renewed,
- we get to celebrate capping DCI at 450 and 325, even though we just made it clear caps are negotiable,
- we assist in getting rid of 50 seaters the company doesn’t want and increase the size of the most mainline substitutive and profitable jet DCI has by 27% and therein increase it from 43% of the DCI fleet to 72%,
- and not to be missed, Bill maybe maybe gets to take the ? off his avatar and gets to become a 717A.
Sorry FTB, but no matter how you slant this thing, it still looks to me like more flying for us and less flying for them. We go from 598 to 450 RJ’s and we go from 56%/46% mainline vs DCI domestic block hours to a minimum 61%/39%. Not sure why you think caps are negotiable after the contract is signed. Whether or not we still get the 717’s if the TA goes down in flames is anybody’s guess. I have a feeling that after a punitive measure of some sort we actually would, but I wouldn’t bet my first beer on it. If you want to risk Bill’s A seat in an attempt to squeeze the company a little harder, then you will have to deal with him when Air Umpty Squat buys the 717’s instead. 
P.S. Your side of the argument loses credibility when you base part of it on "If we turn down the TA we'll get the 717's anyway." Maybe yes, maybe no. If we take everything on face value, you are completely wrong. We will not be getting the 717's. If we were to use this assumption, then conceivably we could make all sorts of other assumptions and possibly false conclusions as well. Do you really think if the TA is tanked, that RA would just immediately say, “OK guys, you got me. I was bluffing and the 717’s are on the way anyway?” I find that thought process flawed. Just wanted to clarify that point.