Originally Posted by
sailingfun
If the company asked for 25 additional 76 seat RJ's but tied it to a 4 to 1 ratio of additional 100 seat aircraft at the mainline and a net overall reduction of 50 airframes at DCI would that be a concession? We gain 100 mainline airframes and reduce the number of seats at DCI but the company gets additional 76 seat airframes. The Devil is always in the details. One mans concession could be another mans gold!
I am personally against any relaxation on Scope but do agree that reasonable people may disagree on whether the above is a concession or not. I would put your above scenario more in the compromise category than concession.
What I would label as clearly concessionary includes but is not limited to:
Increased seat locks of any kind.
Increased restrictions regarding sick leave.
First Officers losing the ability to Bid with LCA.
Loss of payback days for reserve Green-slips.
Speaking of seat locks - I could not find any mention of them in the contract comparison. Based on informal questioning of AMR and UAL Pilots it appears we are currently very similar to AMR, but already much more restrictive regarding seat locks than UAL. I really hope we do not concede any more in this regard.
Scoop