Originally Posted by
aa73
Here are the facts. Whether you believe them or not is up to you.
APA was mainly after sequence protection for super long haul (12+ hours.)
As someone above said, don't think for a minute that APA would turn down extra flying - the key word being "extra." DFW-PEK was NOT extra flying - they would just pull a 777 from some other market and replace it with this one. We are not accepting new aircraft like CO and DL. But we are not about to grant contract relief for free while not making sure we're covered for the contingencies. Why can't other unions do the same?
Understandable; you should have 'pay protection' for lost hours that were awarded----that's only fair.
But, your statement "We are not accepting new aircraft like CO and DL" is a little mis-leading. First, AA has almost 700 mainline jets, while DL and CO are approximately 400. AA has a higher market share in most int'l markets, too. And, AA has 54 B-777s to fly any new Asia routes. CO only has 18 777s and DL only 8. Nowhere NEAR the long-haul WB lift AA has for additional Asia flights. And, AA is getting rid of 16 fairly new P&W/ETOPS (ex-TWA) B-757s, which DL has leased from ILFC, for additional ATL/CVG/JFK-Europe flying. As any layman could observe, any mainline jets leaving AA are NOT going to be replaced anytime soon, and why in the world AA would allow competitors to lease these low-time jets is beyond me.
And lastly, I'm sure AA management does not consider those extra items you mentioned APA wanted attached to the China route award 'no-cost'. EVERYthing is 'cost' to AA.