Originally Posted by
300SMK
Why do we insist on being the industry leader in destroying domestic scope clauses? C12 brought more 76-seaters to DL and subsequently added them to AAL and UAL through their loss of leverage as a result.
That can change in the blink of an eye! Remember the financial crisis of 2008 and age 65? You are aware that overseas carriers have retirement ages beyond 65 and financials across the oceans on either side are not looking real hot.
Despite SEA being a hub, the carveout for LAX remained in the TA- they could still fly to and from LAX and from LAX and SEA to any non-DL airport.
They aren't here yet. In my nine years we have ordered other airframes, even installed a sim, and yet there was never an AE for any of those planes.
They showed up, they just went to foreign carriers.
I wonder how the former AAL Fokker 100 and NWA DC9-10 pilots would've felt about seeing a CRJ-900, MRJ or E-Series parked next to them? Exactly, it would've been nuclear.
Stop making the same mistakes and trying to justify bad decisions of the past. Scope is not for sale, your generation did not manage it well. We all have an employment contact with DL, Section 1 is the only link to the rest of that flying.
First of all you are preaching to the choir. As I said I was furloughed along with 1310 other DAL Pilots, in my opinion, as a direct result of a very poor Scope clause.
I don't know exactly what you mean by "my generation." Scope was a failure before I was hired and got worse real quickly. I lived through a wasted decade and was furloughed due to selling out scope when guys were on the street, DCI was hiring thousands, and DAL was parking mainline jets right and left. Excuse me if I don't see more 76 seaters as a crisis now when everything is 180 out from the last decade. The scope line is firmly drawn and the 100 seat jets are going to mainline. We held the line at 76 seats. Small Jet scope is the last war - JVs and Codeshares are the 800 lb gorilla now.
We have a different opinion of improving small jet scope. In my opinion if we fly a greater number of passengers via mainline and less via DCI we are improving Scope.
I voted yes on C-2012 and think that was a Scope win. We are hiring as quick as we can and new guys are achieving upgrades in times unheard of with "my generation" of hires.
Furthermore you say:
That can change in the blink of an eye! Remember the financial crisis of 2008 and age 65?
Well now this sounds exactly like the argument the MEC was using in trying to sell the POS TA-15. Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt (FUD) - remember? We better approve the TA because things could get worse.
Finally if this did happen and we were still negotiating do you think we would have more or less leverage?
Scoop