Seems American and United have had no problem keeping the 50 seaters going.

During TA2 negotiations company asked for 50 more large RJs in exchange for the removal of all remaining 125 50 seaters. Word is the MEC finally gave the NC authority to use it as a bargaining chip after heated debate but at the table the company decided not to trade anything more for it.

While many see this type of trade as selling scope I see it as gaining scope while the company pays us more from the cost savings of removing expensive to operate 50 seaters from the fleet. Removing 6250 seats(125 50 seaters) adding 3800 seats(50 76 seaters) leaves a gulf of 2450 seats(22 110 seaters).

On the other hand one could adopt a longer term strategy, hold tight on current scope and wait out however long it takes for 50 seater lifespan to run out in order to replace the 6250 50 seater seats with 56 110 mainline jets.

IMO C2012 generated cries of selling scope when it actually drove significant hiring and movement within the Delta pilot ranks due to scope recapture. Hiring at Delta has far exceeded hiring at United and American. If a similar type trade reappears in C2019 negotiations I am in favor of it.

and this is why you need to stay far far away from anything union related.

So would you be willing to allow 737's at DCI as long as the net DCI seat count was lower?

76 seaters, which are really 90 seaters, are way too big to be outsourced. More is no longer an option. They can operate as many as they want, and trade as many 50 seaters that they no longer want to get them, they just have to be flown by mainline pilots.

Absolutely not. The 737 is already a mainline airplane. The goal is to continue to shrink DCI at an increased pace while picking up jobs and increased benefits for mainline.

The DC-9-10 was a mainline airplane.

I'm not interested in allowing any more larger RJ's. The original order was for about twenty 70 seaters (you know, to "help" them help us develop markets for mainline LOL!) and now we have over 300. Let them choke on their aging POS 50 seaters as they try to staff them with medical school levels of debt new hires if that's what they want to do. They already have WAY more of the large RJ's than they should and the only negotiations about it should be about reducing that number.

Why let emotions get in the way.

Mathematics is key. Shrink DCI while increasing mainline pay, benefits and jobs.

C2012 proves this formula has been an overwhelming success.

They really really want them gone. I believe both companies are well below their allowable number of 50 seaters by scope.

The 50 seaters are planes the company doesn't want. We aren't even at the number of 50 seat airframes allowed. Using airframes the company is already parking to allow them to get airframes they want anyway is foolish on our part, and yes, it is a scope give. 76 seaters in the first place was a give and every additional one is a give too. If it wasn't a give, why would the company want it?

Airframes aren't replaced based on a fleet seat count.


It was not scope recapture. It was giving the company something they wanted in exchange for us "getting" something the company already wanted I the first place.

By your logic, E195s at DCI would be acceptable if total seat count went down. We don't operate them as a mainline airplane after all.

We could shrink DCI by allowing 737's though. What's the difference? As long as DCI shrinks, why let emotions get in the way?

More 76 seaters is a concession that is simply not needed.

Why stop at 737s? What if Delta said DCI could be shrunk to 1 airframe, but its a 747. Would you agree?

More 76 seaters allows Management to get rid of the 50 seaters faster since they are under contract and there would be something to swap with. I'm sure if they could get rid of them all today and replace with A220 they would.