Originally Posted by
jsled
From the UAL MEC Pro Statement:
SCOPE
Perhaps the most important gains found in the TA lie in the area of Scope. We firmly believe that the JNC accomplished the primary objective of Scope by protecting and growing quality jobs at the mainline while reducing the overall UAX footprint, which in the end will reduce the amount of outsourced jobs. International Scope now requires metal in the market and has eliminated the possibility of Joint Ventures such as Aer Lingus. Some of the harshest critics at the MEC agree this is Industry Leading.
Highlights of Scope are the tying of a max percentage of UAX block hours to mainline single aisle block hours. If the company wants to expand its fleet of 70/76 seat aircraft beyond a certain fleet size, it must correspondingly purchase Small Narrowbody Aircraft specifically designated by type in the TA while reducing the percentage of UAX block hours. If fully exercised, this provision means that 700-800 more mainline pilots getting paid rates agreed upon in the TA will fly these aircraft. Even if the company chooses not to increase 76 seat aircraft in order to avoid taking delivery of new mainline aircraft, a hard cap remains in place and a block hour limit, more stringent than current contract, attaches immediately. Furthermore, limiting leg length, reducing the percentage of Hub to Hub flying, and requiring that UAX flights either enter or leave a hub or a named market ensures that UAX becomes a true feeder operation instead of our competition.
Con Statements from CAL and UAL MEC No Voters-
UAL-
Scope:
The 2012 TA Scope section represents a major concession by both pilot groups. TA Scope is slightly tighter than Delta Scope, thus it could be argued in that context, that this section is Industry‐Leading. However, it must be said that the UAL MEC direction to the NC was clear: “nothing less than DAL pay for DAL scope.” This TA falls short.
CAL-
SECTION 1- SCOPE
While the language that guides our scope restrictions has been tightened up, the fact that we are moving from 50-seat to 76-seat aircraft with respect to Express Flying carries a huge price tag and moves us further away from our goal of limiting not just the quantity of outsourced flying, but the quality of outsourced flying as well. One of the most consistent expectations we saw from previous polling data of our pilots was to “hold the line” with respect to outsourced flying. This TA does not accomplish that.
Even though there is a hard cap on the number of “regional” aircraft, this new generation of airplanes are no longer merely “feeder” aircraft that provide traffic from smaller outstations to hubs as they were intended to do. They now have the capability of operating segments that are longer than three hours, provide mainline passenger comfort, and first class seating.
It's important to note that while there is a formula that limits the number of 76-seat aircraft (1-C-1-g), this TA still allows the company to operate up to 153 76-seaters at 120% of our mainline single-aisle block hours, should the company elect to not exercise its right to increase 76-seaters. In other words, while most of us look at the grand total (“what's the limit?”), there's no proof that they intend to reach that limit, and if they don't, there's no requirement for them to reduce the block hour ratio.