In a rolling 12 month period. Which on the surface seems good, but the more I think about it, well, it seems odd. Lets say there's a downturn so for a while the company can't add codeshare flying or partner up with others because we've reduced some flying, however once that rolling 12 months window catches up, they can just add a block hour and hire a guy and suddenly are able to renegotiate all their deals and add more? I dunno, maybe I'm misunderstanding that part but I'm not sold yet either.

You are not wrong. This scenario is also possible:

"Codeshare agreements are not one year at a time. They are long term agreements.

So, this year, which is a multi-year low growth rate for BJ of about 6%, they sign a 7 year extensive codeshare agreement with Alaska.

Next year the board decides margin expansion is the airlines priority and they no longer need to grow out West, because we are selling tickets to connect onto Alaska's West coast network. So they defer half our aircraft deliveries for the next 5 years and cut our ASM or block hour growth to 2.5% (or .01% for that matter).

What happens to the 7 year extensive Alaska codeshare agreement? Nothing.

It doesn't need to be renewed, amended or entered into.

Same goes for Moxy and Hawaiian and JetSuiteX and and and."

So, what is to stop someone from starting an airline with E2s or C-Series that sells their own tickets and codeshares with JB? Maybe competing with JB initially at a loss, JB management exits the route because yields are down, then code shares with that same airline that drove them out of the market?

This is how we will keep growing...with metal from another carrier. And all JB has to do is net +1 pilot/year?

Very concerning.

Yes, I watched the video. Yes, I've read the scope. Seems to me this threatens JB...or maybe I'm just too stupid to get this through my head.

GP

They wouldnt codeshare out that much flying- Its not profitable enough.
Yes, the overhead costs are diminished, but so are the profits.
On a broader, conceptual note, contrary to popular belief, Airlines dont find ways to screw pilots over- They find ways to make the MOST money and sometimes the pilots get hosed as a result.
My point is that just because something is not specifically addressed in a CBA, doesnt mean it will happen. A CBA is meant to mitigate REASONABLE actions that the company will take, not ALL actions.
A CBA that limits ALL possible company actions, would be thousands of pages long. At some point you just put up enough road blocks and figure said company wont shoot themselves in the foot just to screw the pilot group.
To someones point "How is this good for Jblu pilots?"
It requires a measure of growth- Which is good.
I believe that no level of growth would satisfy codeshares for some of you, and I totally get that too.
To you Beatnavy- I appreciate your belief in a zero codeshare based on the SWA model, but are you willing to lose some flying that we do because of codeshares in order to limit jetblue? Not sure if that is ideal either.
Now, with B6, all fears could come true. Do you guys want zero protection for another year or more?

We should be asking ourselves, what stops JetBlue from doing this now? They dont because they dont make a profit on it. Seems like these questions are being asked of the union and they're being addressed on the FAQ. Pretty good stuff on there.

Exactly- Now after a TA, theyll find the loophole that makes them less money, just to **** us off?
No, theyll continue to operate to make cash, while we will have more protection, pay and QOL.

Agreed. And they key seems to be that other airlines have limits, and they can still increase codesharing when they're shrinking. We cannot! This seems pretty solid to me.

Codesharing is actually needed for some of our growth.

The codeshares themselves aren’t that profitable, but the pax getting into our network become profitable when they connect on us. Using the ALK example, if we throw a bunch of people into codeshares on the west coast and make money off them when they board a connecting JetBlue plane, the company makes money. Great. A JetBlue pilot flies that pax at some point. Great. What’s not great is now the company has less reason to try to expand organically in those markets. They are already getting connections from those markets on a HZ/SKW/ALK plane.

How do you imagine we will lose flying without codeshares I’m speaking about? We don’t currently have those codeshares. The codeshares we have are on routes/equipment we don’t/can’t feasibly fly. BOS-ACK? Don’t care about that piston flying. Intl connections we can’t fly ourselves? Don’t care, until we have the capability to fly it ourselves. FLL-JAX I believe is what N8 used as a silver example...but I can’t seem to find any FLL-JAX direct flights on silver, so I dunno if that’s via a 2 leg silver flight. Regardless, if silver connects our pax elsewhere that we don’t fly...that’s fine.

What I do care about is codeshares we don’t have yet, eg Alaska. Alaska connecting all our pax to intra-cali and other west coast flying we just can’t seem to get right. The good part about it is it could add more pax to our network. The bad part: that limits our need to grow in there on our own. My whole point is codeshares are fine for places we can’t fly ourselves. But for places we can fly ourselves, we should do it ourselves. And we should put limits on existing codeshares for places which we become capable of flying (HNL, or wherever). But this TA leaves domestic codeshares wide open. I just see ALK/Moxy codeshares growing faster than our own organic growth under those agreements. If we had solid growth I wouldn’t be as concerned. But clearly our west coast strategy is failing, our block hour growth is anemic, and the provisions and protections in codesharing are pretty slim.

If the company “wouldn’t codeshare out that much flying” as you state, why wouldn’t they let us limit it in the TA or allow more strict codeshare controls? Clearly they want it for a reason. If they didn’t want to expand our codeshares, they would have allowed us to codify what we have now and just codeshare on routes we can’t feasibly fly, domestically and internationally. And to your point about more specifics adding up to be thousands of pages long, this language I want could exist in the same space that exists now, with different wording.

My understanding it the only agreement that has more restrictions on codeshare is SWA. The fact that jb can draw feed from alk doesn't mean its less likely to put jb metal on the route. they'll put metal on the route if they can make a profit.

When has a company not tried to limit everything a pilot group has asked for? Why would they let us eliminate it completely? We state our desire, they state their limits. Negotiations.
My point about the length of a 100% restrictive contract is that its not possible. We negotiate to a point where we feel we get enough restriction or at least some restriction and then we move on to the other parts of Scope like FFD/M&A etc. Could we have stipulated more of a growth number? Sure. As well we could have gotten pay higher/benefits and profit sharing. I am okay with the section including the Codesharing language.
I see why you want elimination of codeshares just like SWA, but do you want their work rules. At some point you have to accept the give and take of the process.
In respect BN.

Silver Airways Begins Flights From Fort Lauderdale to Jacksonville | New Times Broward-Palm Beach

It appears they did it, and now they dont, and we do...im guessing because we could make money on it.

And are you saying you "dont care about that piston flying" when its now jet flying that we do?? How do you make sense?

Oh, I think you are referring to MOXY!!!

Navy had a great explanation. The FAQ is down playing the issue. The codeshare would be intra-cali and intra-west. We CAN'T fly those routes because there are NO more gates available at the premium airports, which would be at one end of each leg we would codeshare on. To fly the routes we would codeshare on, we would instead have to build a robust intra-cali/west route network. We can't (no gates) and we haven't and we won't (cost to develop is way more than JB is willing to RISK and INVEST). Buy VA was the strategy to begin a West coast network, it failed. You won't like the new strategy nearly as much.

I can virtually guarantee our JB NC opening position was NO domestic codeshare, like SW. The company would have refused. Our fallback position was highly likely to be very limited domestic codeshare. The company again refused.

We ended up with almost unrestricted domestic codeshare because the company demanded it.

In this contract the company didn't really give up ANYTHING it held completely sacred, except MAYBE 5hr ADG. We went into this virtually demanding better healthcare and improvements to the unilateral profit sharing plan they crammed down our throats. We failed.

We got RJ scope (because the company had no intention of capacity purchase agreements, still glad we got it in writing) and we DIDN'T achieve strong limits on domestic codesharing because the company refused (we may very well learn why soon enough).

For most of JBs existence, the airline planned to eventually build it's own West coast network or buy Virgin America.

They now realize they can't do either.

Plan C is most likely Alaska codeshare, Moxy codeshare to smaller airports out West and more JetSuiteX out West..

Another great post.

Your first paragraph is the big explanation. This is how/why Delta-Alaska and AA-Alaska maintained large domestic codeshares for so many years in SEA.

The argument that JB won't domestic codeshare because it only makes pennies on the dollar is wrong, proven by history. Delta and Alaska are two of the highest margin airlines in the world, and only reduced their codeshare because AK refused to end it's codeshare with AA.

I have to ask you guys, did Alaska and Delta not want the "whole dollar"?

You are not seeing all the moving parts.

You guys worried about the codeshare thing realize there has been nothing stopping jetBlue from doing this for its entire existence right?

How do i make sense? Cape air flies piston twins. We codeshare with cape. Cape flies small planes on small short routes not exactly suited for jets, therefore by codesharing with them we aren’t losing anything. Same argument as the widebody side...we don’t have equipment suited for those routes. Silver flies turboprops. They are the FLL-JAX codeshare example used in the section 1 video. I’m guessing you haven’t watched it. Everyone else seems to understand what I’m saying.

You realize we tried to buy an airline to grow our west coast presence after our entire existence we were told “organic growth” only? We’ve always been a growth airline and grown organically...until we don’t. We have failed at growing in the west coast, especially recently. Buying virgin—fail. Organic growth in/out of LGB—fail. They are obviously getting creative now. Just because we can do it and have been able to doesn’t mean we won’t...hence the company’s desire to keep the option open with few restrictions.

Holy cow, I just explained that two posts ago:

"For most of JBs existence, the airline planned to eventually build it's own West coast network or buy Virgin America.

They now realize they can't do either.

Plan C is most likely Alaska codeshare, Moxy codeshare to smaller airports out West and more JetSuiteX out West.."

Our NC and union are very intelligent. They know, as ***SWA know*******, that domestic codeshare is an important issue.

Our scope opening position would be to copy SWA, the true industry leader in scope.

The question you should be asking yourselves is "WHY did management dig in their heels and refuse domestic codeshare restrictions"?.

That should tell you how important it is to management.

The videos, backed up by...........reading the contract, and FAQ's, contract comparison, and eventually a roadshow have, will and have been very informative. The information is ALL there you just have to do your part. I hope more show the importance of your vote and your career than what your fellow pilot tells you in the cockpit, and what fellow pilots did not do by showing support (for the process) at the last union meeting where you can express your opinion and thoughts as constituents.

There should be no excuse.

Your own argument fails itself. They let us scope out RJs completely! So why did they stand so strong on domestic codesharing?

We went in as a union absolutely guns blazing on healthcare improvements and profit sharing improvements. We failed, because the company didn't want to separate us from the other work groups because it would show other work groups that they need to unionize to get good benefits. They (the company) will absolutely not give what they hold sacred.

So, why did they fold like a wet blanket on RJs but build a fortress around domestic codeshare?

I've been trying to explain it....

No excuse for what?

So its SWA or nothing for you- thanks for clarifying.

Don't be a moron.

I'M NOT SAYING VOTE NO.

I may very well end up holding my nose and voting YES.

But, I do want us all to know what is likely coming in the future.

That's all Bozo. I know you desperately want this to pass, so you lash out at ANY criticism.

For me, this is just a warning, not a NO campaign.

I havent called you names and it appears as though you're the one lashing out BD.
Part of me wants to see how a rejection would play out, and Ive stated that before.
When all you have left is name-calling and rage, your childish approach to people is apparent.
Monitor your blood pressure BD, its peaking.
Lots of luck man.

I was just telling you what NOT to be.

You get unhinged at any dissension from your perspective and revert to a playground mentality BD.
And in fairness, we all do at times.
Good luck to ya.

My fear is that if we give the company almost unlimited domestic code share then our growth slows down to a trickle.

Gup

You guys keep going around in circles in this debate. I think we'd all like a Section 1 agreement that mirrored SWA. No one wants another airline conducting flying we could do ourselves. I think when we all decided to become Airline Pilots, we knew the inherent risks that came with this profession....9/11, down economy, Flag of Convenience (NAI), Scope. I believe our MEC achieved all they could with Section 1, but that's my opinion. I still respect anyone who would vote NO on this issue, cause I think it could effect our future growth.

I agree. I also think the NC did all they could, because I believe the company built a fortress around domestic codesharing.

A fortress built of terrible, terrible pay scales.

I didn’t realize you were in those planning meetings. My apologies BD. :rolleyes:

Or you could pay attention.

What did they tell you about the fleet review??

I'm not allowed to say. But just like standard BlueJet, there's no way you could be disappointed!

Are we keeping the plain Popcorners or going with Jalapeno?
;)

I'm under a PNDA.















"popcorner" NDA.

Oh please Bozo. You’re a yes, this ta could have you scrubbing lavs and you’d be a yes. What happened?! You used to have a head on you, Cheif pilot prospects???