Just received this update. Despite the cease and desist issued by CALALPA, it's safe to say the company has given us the finger regarding the 70 seat RJs and CAL scope. Reach out to the pilots of Skywest and Shuttle America. If this won't unite us, nothing will. Get involved. Stay unified. Call your reps. Stay tuned for SPSC updates...especially as Thanksgiving approaches. 
Frats,
LifeNtheFstLne
CAL 757/767 FO
CAL MEC SPECIAL UPDATE- NOV 10,2010 ALPA: The Pilots Union
Nov. 10, 2010
SCOPE UPDATE 2
On Monday, we gave you an update on the status of Continental’s plan to place the CO code on United Express flights using 70-seat jets to and from CLE, EWR, and IAH. We told you that we had exchanged information and formal arguments related to the issue and that we had provided a deadline (today) for receiving confirmation from management that they had ceased and desisted with their plans.
We received a communication from management today, but it did not include their intent to cease and desist. To the contrary, they fully intend to move forward with their plans. In light of their ill-advised decision to proceed and as we have forewarned, we will now begin work on taking the appropriate legal actions available to us in the coming days and weeks. Watch for more details from the union soon, beginning with information for upcoming SPSC events in EWR and IAH later this month.
In order to provide you with information about our stated reasons why management’s plan is in violation of our CBA, as well as the points provided by management, we are summarizing the communications that were exchanged last week. The summary is outlined below.
Our position is that Section 1, Part 3-A of the CBA clearly prohibits the Company action, unless it is authorized by some other Part of Section 1. No other Part of Section 1 authorizes the Company course of action, as none of the express carriers performing the work is a Company affiliate; only 50-seat and turboprop flying, not 70-seat jet flying, is permitted by Part 4; and flying to a Company hub (if not to or from a hub of the other carrier) is not permitted by Part 5.
The Company relies on Part 7, arguing that it is flying by another air carrier while participating in a Complete Transaction in accordance with Part 7. It is our position, however, that while Part 7 specifies rules for separation and merger of mainline operations, Part 7 does not change the rules in Parts 4 or 5 for operation of Express carriers or Complementary Carriers. Nor does Part 7 license Continental to permit United Express carriers SkyWest or Shuttle America to carry the CO code without observing the limits in Parts 4 or 5, because neither of them is a “participant” in a Complete Transaction. Neither express carrier is acquiring any part of Continental, nor is it becoming a Parent of the Company. Nor is Continental acquiring Control of assets of either carrier. Further, if either of these air carriers were participating in a Complete Transaction with the Company, that participation would trigger a series of obligations that the Company has not applied.
The Company also argues that following the merger closing, United and Continental will each continue to operate as an air carrier, but they are not prohibited from integrating their marketing, reservations systems and livery, ultimately marketing and operating their service under a blend of the United name and Continental livery. But this argument relies on general actions associated with a merger to dissolve specific protections at the heart of the CBA, as well as mixing those actions which the Company can undertake now with those that must wait until after a JCBA (and integrated seniority list) are reached. Ultimately, their actions are not an effort to transition Continental and Continental Express operations to the single UA code, but to replace 50-seat jets in Continental hubs with 70-seat jets and to connect them with Continental flights, branded as Continental flights under the CO code, strictly as a way of carrying more passengers and thus making more money.
Of course, Continental can always operate its own 70-seat jets under the CO code by doing so under the Continental CBA with Continental pilots. But if they do not do so, we have insisted that they act in accordance with the Continental CBA until and unless changed. Additionally, as we have mentioned in previous communications both to our pilots and to management, we have no reservations about using the full range of legal vehicles available to bring resolution to this issue and ultimately prevent outsourcing in violation of our current CBA.
One Union. One Voice.
Capt. Jay Pierce
CAL MEC Chairman