I'm not so sure its a "loss of wide body jobs" though.

Set aside the effects of VB for now (since we can and should immediately pull it down IMO) and the only part you can really point to is 48.5 going to 46.5. But that's not really a concession when you look at it in totality.

The current 48.5 is based off an asinine 4 year period. For most of that, they can go as low as they want with no limits to how low, as long as they hit 48.5 once. The current one still keeps the 48.5, but allows 46.5 on a hard yearly basis if 650K GHB's are protected, which is a lot more than would be protected even if the 48.5 JV ESK balance maintained.

It doesn't take a lot of math to see how a hard 46.5, even if perfectly maintained as a ceiling (which I don't think they can even do nor will they even try) will yield a greater balance in the TAJV than a no floor/no floor/no floor/48.5 would.

If their goal is to go as low as possible for one year and then catch back up, the TA provision would I guess allow that. But even then the job loss estimate would only be for a year. If the goal is to do as little flying with our pilots as possible on an ongoing basis, then the TA provision actually protects us far more even in the TAJV.

That said, either the previous or current language can be rendered almost meaningless by significant changes to equipment, so in that case both are equally lacking.