what part of they are going to drop the 50 seaters anyways is so hard to understand? Why should we 'negotiate' for something they are going to do anyways.

More DC-9 sized "RJ's" is a very big deal to many, and more and more by the day. Due to rapid, seismic demographic shifts taking place, this may very well be the last opportunity for management to get a single desirable thing WRT bottom end scope and they know it.

Yes they could drop the 50 seaters anyway and let the contracts expire naturally over the several years while we have 0% raises because we want to fight anything that helps the company even if it helps us more in return. Great idea.

Again, I fail to see what we get for the large RJ give. You're saying the company will let us keep the profit sharing ALREADY IN PLACE for more large RJs. That makes no sense - we don't have to give up something we already have if we're willing to give up something in another area? What? How is that a gain for us again?

The reason 30 more large RJs from C2012 haven't hurt us is because the company can't seem to get rid of the 50's fast enough. C2012 has nothing to do with that.

If C2012 had nothing to do with that, again I ask, why the difference in movement with AA vs UAL and Delta? Why are the Legacies that implemented Scope Choke rapidly expanding while the legacy that didn't is shrinking? AA has 600 regional airframes and many 50 seaters. Delta has 425 and this proposal takes it down to 350 in the next 4 years. Why the difference?

The difference is in the fact you have different companies with different business plans. If Delta wanted more 50's in service, they could have them and be within the PWA ratios - they aren't even close to the PWA limit. Heck, if Delta wanted to have more than the PWA allowable 50's, they could and would do that as well if it made sense for the company's business plan.

Now let me ask you a question, because I honestly don't know the answer. Didn't the company threaten extending the life of the 50's and not parking them if TA2015 was voted down? Did they follow through on that or are the 50's being retired at a rapid rate?

They did threaten that but did not follow thru. They were clearly bluffing. 50 seat fleet still has shrank.

I'm in agreement that there will still will be growth absence an increase in big RJ relief. The big question is, will there be a deal for pilots by remaining militant.

TBV, this is totally and completely wrong. You need to go back and read the contract. I'll quote here for your education:

"Note one: Upon the delivery of a 223rd 76-seat aircraft, the number of permitted 50-seat aircraft will be 125 regardless of the number otherwise provided in Section 1 b. 46. f. Exception one."

And it is an emotional issue that is causing them to step over $10s to grab at those nickles. Hopefully enough people see thru the folly of it.

It's called negotiation. Shall I google that for you?

Oh just so wrong.