Often on less full flights, people 'spread out' to economy comfort. Here's a way to make sure they pay for it. Shouldn't see any difference from a non rev point of view... Gotta love the name... they actually had a contest... and the winner is... Prius! Er, I mean, Prelude! aka Quaalude, aka Honda, etc...

 

I think some might see how small their seat is, or who they are next to and think, "hey, that Economy Comfort seat doesn't look too bad! How much again?"

 

Timbo, Shiz and PG thanks for your responses to my question. I was hoping Bar, FTB and GeorgeTG would weigh-in, but they didn't.

PG,

I'd take your bet in a heartbeat, and genuinely hope to lose, but there's a rub. Bear with me... I don't remember which forum member had it as part of his signature but it was something like "not one more pound, not one more seat, not one more jet". That succinctly summed up my feelings on scope prior to contract 2012.

I genuinely view our contract to be highly concessionary in terms of scope, as it relates to numbers and size of RJ's. But ALPA spins it as a win. So had we bet prior to 2012 I'd be saying you owe the DPCF, and you'd be saying I welched.

I do think FTB proposes a reasonable definition of what constitutes a scope concession, and fair criteria for a bet. I will be a copycat and offer the same terms as FTB. I hope I lose, BIGTIME!

 

AMR 12yr rates as of 1/1/15. . . DAL 12yr CA
Group 1 CA $118.63 . . . . . 717 . . 195.19
Group 2 CA $174.46 . . . 88/32/73 . 205.56/209.31/216.92
Group 3 CA $188.06 . . . . 757/767 . 226.21
Group 4 CA $221.63 . . . . 33/78/777 . 255.28/258.90/270.25

AMR 12yr rates . 1/1/16 . . DAL CA 12yr 1/1/15
Group 1 CA $138.79 . . . . . . 717 . . 195.19
Group 2 CA $204.11 . . . . 88/32/73 . 205.56/209.31/216.92
Group 3 CA $220.04 . . . . 757/767 . 226.21
Group 4 CA $259.31 . . . . 33/78/777 . 255.28/258.90/270.25

Gp 1 All aircraft less than 118 seats
Gp 2 MD80, all 319/20/21 and 737 variants
Gp 3 757/762/763/A300
Gp 4 764/787/777/A330/A350

 

I think the small jet scope was pretty decent considering your metric.... red font is mine...

The big win was the international and JV language, which was all but non-existent in the pervious PWA.... How much stronger is our hand WITH C2012 JV language now that the Virgin Atlantic deal is imminent!?

 

The company hasn't had any trouble getting the union and the pilot group to sign off on moving scope around (it's a shell game). What some see as a win others see as a loss.

For me, no more 70+ seat Rj's with no exceptions. It's a bit scary to me that so many guys beat their chest with the battle cry of Scope, only to vote yes on C2012. I'd be shocked if the company doesn't pitch another package like we saw in 2012. I think it's also a possibility that if a merger were to come about they will use the "it's only their scope + ours" line. We'll probably fall for it.

Any future TA that's gives any bottom end scope and doesn't further tighten up JV/codeshare language is a automatic NO vote from me, don't even need to see the rest of the TA. I'll be surprised if I vote yes for the next TA solely based on the above, hope I'm wrong.

 

Would you please further clarify your betting position as if it also included the Virgin Atlantic, AF/KLM and Alaska (including outsourced affiliate) flying as well as the rumored aircraft order.

Also, recall the 76 seat line in the sand wasn't put up for memrat.

 

Shiz;
I like your style, but have you begun to grow a mustache?

red font mine

 

Hahaha. First part: thanks!
second part: Not a chance!

I have it on pretty solid info that the MEC will absolutely enforce the AFKLAZ JV language... But it's not a violation until it's a violation. The Company has the chance to fix it: chances are slim to none!

You'll have to call your rep, but I am not aware of the Company "walking away" from any Virgin Atl. negotiations

 

By passing our 2015 rates, I meant at the end of their contract.