Originally Posted by eaglefly

I didn't say the majority of pilots have no price for scope. Some do, but for others there IS a price. I think the majority who do have a price for scope though, think this offer falls short. The APA counter just MAY not demand complete ignorance of any scope alterations, BTW. My point is that scope (like it or not) IS considered a bargaining chip. That doesn't mean it's automatically used, but doesn't mean it won't. As I said before, I'm not that concerned about scope and any misguided need Parker has for loading up NOW on 70-seat jets. If they're ostensibly going to be placed at regionals, I'll have a lot of laughs watching Parker make that work. I don't see scope relaxation as any win for him as the present number of airframes is destined to shrink considerably and adding seats to those fewer airframes will be a Pyrrhic victory in the long run for him in both the emptyness of the payoff and the bridges he burned to get that empty payoff.



The old "commuter" wasn't a bad gig, but it ran its course. Too many wanted to turn it into an upgrade mill at all costs and that we agree. Management loved it (and obviously Parker still does, although DAL and UAL see the future), but now the inevitable by-product of that philosophy had come home to roost and few want to make huge time and financial investment for a crap existence and murky promises.

Just about the time this proposal's duration arrives, this same philosophy will come home to roost at the legacies and then Parker (or the poor sap who inherits that disaster) will be screwed. That day WILL come and if I'm even still in this so-called profession, I'm confident I'll watch his pleas will be met with shrugged shoulders and best wishes.