Originally Posted by
gettinbumped
Howdy Joe,
I don't have the CAL contract, but I'm guessing it would be the same language that prohibited CAL from flying 70 seaters out of IAH, CLE, or EWR with CAL codes on them, which is how these flights are being marketed. The CAL pilots position is that they still operate under their contract, so the UAL scope does not apply to CAL coded flying. I'm sure someone who has the actual contract will chime in here, but that won't help you. The argument is not the language, it's how you INTERPRET the language. Clearly every side will INTERPRET it the way that best suits their goals, so you aren't going to get anywhere there until its ruled upon by some sort of enforcement body.
Howdy bumped,
Again, I looking for the specific language. The CAL pilots are making some threats without backing it up with specifics. That isn't sitting well with me.
Does everyone realize that CAL has been doing this thru "codeshare" long before this IAH issue came up. I pulled up two examples on the CAL website.
Example 1: FAT to IAH. Using codeshare, the first leg could be on a Mesa CRJ900 (USAirways Express)
Example 2: MFR to IAH. Using codeshare, the first leg is on a United Express 700 (Skywest)
They have been doing this for a long time. Is it the cities of IAH, CLE, and EWR that make the difference?
CAL has been selling tickets on CRJ 700s and 900s for quite some time now....