Originally Posted by
NavyCal
I don't believe our current leadership has any interest in ever growing the airline. While many worldwide airlines are aggressively pursuing plans to utilize the A-380 and/or the 747-800, Jeff is giddy about replacing the Airbus and 737-500s with 255 of the 70/76 seat RJs.
If you think about that and look carefully at 1-C-1-g, this TA will allow the company to operate up to 153 76 seaters at 120% of our mainline single aisle block hours. If they don't intend to grow the airline (and I contend they don't), there's no requirement to reduce the block hour ratio.
The Scope section is a massive concession compared to what we had at Cal. And yes - I know Cal is gone forever, but I am not voting in favor of any concession.
Bottom line: What would Admiral Ackbar say....?
"It's a TRAP!!!!!!!!"
Unfortunately, your scope is long gone thanks to the crud we brought you from L-UAL. You can see unlimited 70 seaters flying under your paint right now. And there is PLENTY more room for UAL to add them, as the block hour ratios in the L-UAL contract include the wide bodies while the TA only includes the narrow bodies.
You have confirmed what I've been saying to L-UAL pilots in your post. You will vote NO to ANY concession. Never mind that there has probably never been a contract in the HISTORY of aviation that's had NO concessions. The longer this goes, the stronger the position for the L-CAL pilots as they hire off the street, take the airplanes that were supposed to go to L-UAL, and watch the L-UAL pilots get furloughed. I see the upside of a "no" vote for a CAL pilot. I just don't see it for a L-UAL pilot.