|
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
(Post 797301)
Oneworld is AMR. Start is UAUA. Depends. I would venture to bet it could happen here if Skyteam started being called airline and we became a third party contractor.
Hi hiring! Nice, If they want us to buy them, they better hope to get that HND slot :D They get that, and they will not be independent for long. When we first started the DAL/NW/CAL codeshare I believe it had to be bargained with DALPA - but then again that was pre-bankruptcy. I do believe however, that one of the reasons why DALPA went the extra mile to ensure that our contract was not thrown out was scope/codeshare/JV type of issues. Perhaps one of our more "in the know posters" will chime in with some better information- I am going by whats left of my memory.:rolleyes: Scoop |
Originally Posted by BigGuns
(Post 797296)
OK I heard this rumor and I hope it is just that.... UAL is SCOP'd to 70 seat a/c at regionals. UAL is now telling their pilots that Republic Airlines will now enter OneWorld as its own airline, selling its own tickets, and will fly E190s with 100 seats as a code share under Star Alliance , thus bypassing SCOPE and the UAL pilots.
So if it does happen... Could it spread here to DAL with SkyTeam? Does anything in our SCOPE prevent it?? Our Section 1 prevents any domestic codesharing on any aircraft with more than 76 seats or certificated for a max gross weight of more than 86,000 pounds. Alaska is an exception. We have separate Section 1 provisions which spell out that arrangement. Republic is already a sore subject. If you ask me, they are in violation of our scope clause right now even though our code isn't being used on the E-190 flights. Unfortunately, the ALPA National lawyers have over-ruled that view. |
Originally Posted by Check Essential
(Post 797336)
The short answer is yes.
Our Section 1 prevents any domestic codesharing on any aircraft with more than 76 seats or certificated for a max gross weight of more than 86,000 pounds. There's your loophole right there. |
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 797337)
Unfortunately, from my amateur reading of section 1, we're codesharing 76 seats on Alaska's 737s...
There's your loophole right there. The "Alaska Marketing Agreement" has its own exception in our Section 1. The wisdom of that is debatable, but Moak and the MEC like it, so here we are. |
Originally Posted by Check Essential
(Post 797340)
Correct.
The "Alaska Marketing Agreement" has its own exception in our Section 1. The wisdom of that is debatable, but Moak and the MEC like it, so here we are. |
Originally Posted by Check Essential
(Post 797340)
Correct.
The "Alaska Marketing Agreement" has its own exception in our Section 1. The wisdom of that is debatable, but Moak and the MEC like it, so here we are. |
Originally Posted by Check Essential
(Post 797336)
The short answer is yes.
Our Section 1 prevents any domestic codesharing on any aircraft with more than 76 seats or certificated for a max gross weight of more than 86,000 pounds. Alaska is an exception. We have separate Section 1 provisions which spell out that arrangement. Republic is already a sore subject. If you ask me, they are in violation of our scope clause right now even though our code isn't being used on the E-190 flights. Unfortunately, the ALPA National lawyers have over-ruled that view. Major airlines could be put in the same position that the Regionals have and have to compete to be the lowest cost provider in order to get new flyingor just to keep what they have. Just something to think about. |
Originally Posted by scambo1
(Post 797294)
-------------
Premerger, someone on the DALS side said those planes were met by brass bands harkening their arrival. And the pilot uniform was different, SPWB pilots wore band leader hats and commodore shoulder boards. OTOH, having many WB's that only get paid what a NB does sort of defeats the purpose as well. Any ways, it's all water down the toilet now..... |
Originally Posted by chuck416
(Post 797279)
Hi Guys,
I'm hangin' on to the bottom of -9 captain in MEM, and wondering how I'll fare when we park all the -30 and -40 series aircraft this fall. For the life of me, I can't figure out how I'll NOT be bumped off the bottom. I have my MD preferences in place, of course. At the union meeting last week, our CP (great guy) indicated that there would not be any bumps off the aircraft, but a couple of guys may have to commute. Any comments, ideas, or insight into this? Thanks, Chuck I'm also hearing whisperings that the retirement of the 30/40 may be delayed from this summer/fall back to heavy checks which is a considerable change in time line if true. Need to do some digging on this. |
Originally Posted by Reroute
(Post 797350)
Liked it or inherited it?
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:44 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands