I don’t think it’s an either/or question. We already codeshare on routes we serve with our own metal (I think BOS-ACK and FLL-JAX were mentioned in the Scope video). I guess mgmt sees a benefit in increasing our loads out of those cities via the codeshares. I just looked up two flights on BlueEye, and they each had 4 codeshares assigned to them, so I think it cuts both ways—I’d think we sell a lot more tickets because of the codeshares in a lot of cases.

I don't think you should direct that at me. I know why we codeshare, and why codesharing cuts both ways.

My question was meant to promote thought, and bring about the realization that "JB would fly the route if able because we would want the whole dollar" was an incomplete and historically inaccurate concept.

So then you expected a 100% codesharing restrictive TA?
There are restrictions- Ref Section 1 Paragraph F.
I responded to BNavy with the precise wording- Have you read that section or even watched the video?

Southwest is MUCH more restrictive on codesharing, so there is precedent.

And, regarding your "restrictions", which are a joke:

1. That's only required to add or amend an agreement, not to continue an agreement.

2. That 3% is a very low bar and it's a growth rate well below any historical BlueJet average I'm aware of.

It’s not even 3%...3% is only base to comparison year difference. It’s 1% yearly.

Protected!!!

His lack of ability for reading comprehension strikes again! Hahaha.

False choice, straw man. Obviously 100% would be impossible. We could have some version of the JV language in any future code shares.

If HA flies 1 under the JV language we would have to fly one also. Or it could be a smaller ratio. Just saying the current language gives away the store when it comes to code sharing.

I brought it up in another thread but this one is more relevant so I’ll reiterate. I have yet to hear anyone answer these questions, and I am genuinely curious:

1) Do we currently have any domestic (or intl for that matter) codeshares on routes that we are capable of flying?
2) If (1) is “no,” why would we allow it to start under this TA?
3) Why does the company want this provision in this TA if we currently don’t do it, and haven’t done it in 18 years?
4) What is the company benefit in (3) worth? What did the pilot group gain by allowing them to do that?
5) Does this provision hurt, help, or not affect the pilot group...and why?

We already codeshare on routes we serve domestically, I believe BOS-ACK and FLL-JAX are mentioned as current examples in the Scope video.