The best reason to study history is to learn from the mistakes of the past and not repeat those mistakes in the future.

For all the AirTran folks out there, rumor is the TA that was reached allows AirTran to farm out everything with 86 seats or less! If this is true, this TA needs to be voted down. The 717 only holds 12/105. An 86 seat regional jet will replace mainline jobs. Let me say that again. An 86 seat regional jet will replace mainline jobs!!! What good is a decent contract if your job will be replaced. You won't be around to reap the rewards.

Ask any pilot at a legacy airline if it was a big mistake to give up scope. Everyone learned that giving up scope was a horrible idea. They made this mistake in the past. AirTran has a chance to learn from that mistake. Do not give up your scope. Vote your TA down.

AirTran's scope would be the worst in the entire industry. For regionals:
Continental is everything 50 seats and under. (Exception of some T-prop's)
American is everything 70 seats and under.
United is everything 70 seats and under.

Unless AirTran offers you a FedEx or UPS style contract, I would not allow anything larger than 50 seats to be outsourced! Also, a good scope clause should have atleast three provisions:
1. Limit on the number of seats (No more than 50 seats should be allowed)
2. Limit on the maximum gross weight (So they can't fly 100 seat aircraft with a lot of first class seats at a regional.
3. Limit on the number of aircraft.
Even if AirTran just wants 50 seat jets, the number of aircraft should be restricted so AirTran doesn't end up with a fleet of 300+ regional jets like many of the legacy airlines!

As for how giving up scope will affect AirTran pilots...
What major airlines have been growing over the past 6 years? The main three that come to mind are Southwest, JetBlue, and AirTran. What do all three of these companies have in common? They don't outsource their flying to regional airlines!!!
American, United, Delta, Continental, Northwest, and US Air have not been growing in the past 6 years. It is not because of a lack of growth in air travel. Every year, the entire systems at these legacy airlines continue to see more and more flights. All the growth has been at the regional level. None of the pilots at these legacy carriers have been able to enjoy the growth in air travel because they gave away their scope. The lack of growth is holding back their fleet progresion, holding back their upgrade, and causing them to loose lots of money and QOL.

If AirTran gives away their scope, they will give away their growth, and all the goodies that come with it (upgrade, increase in seniority, more money, more QOL, etc...)

I don't care how good the contract is. If AirTran gives away anything with up to 86 seats, the TA should be voted down. Hold out on scope. It is one of the very most important sections in your contract right up with pay and workrules. Learn from the mistakes of the past and don't repeat them in the future. Giving away scope will kill your career progression. Vote this TA down!!

 

Good post. Everybody needs to be aware of sneaky mgmt technique... THey will no longer put big prints saying "You sign on this dotted line to give away the farm". Rather, it'll be convoluted in all those numbers, CASM, and such, trying to comfort you it's for growth.

 

Great post except for one point. We've been growing quite a bit since our cutbacks after 9-11. We also have the lowest seat/scope clause out there.

 

Continental has had growth recently, but I believe they are still below their pre-9/11 volume.

I agree that Continental has the best scope clause of the legacies. One thing to be careful of is the clause that allows turboprops with under 79 seats. That allowed Continental to place 74 seat Q400's at Colgan for pay less than GoJet 70 seat pay and Mesa 50 seat pay It is certainly not the biggest problem, but it is something worth looking at in the next contract.


But regardless, AirTran pilots need to vote this TA down!!!

 

Agreed !!!

 

By all indications, it's going down hard.

 

has anyone on this post actually read the TA????
i am not saying it is great but as far as scope is concerned they can only use a percentage of the total ASM in any sub service. and every size/class has a percentage. this includes 86 seats and less and turbo props as well.
if i am wrong let me know but to listen to a YOnited guy talk about this as a "hear say" is a joke. he should be a liltle more corncerned about the 150 southwest departures headin his way a day outta Denver!

 

As soon as LCC starts to fly RJ, all our careers will soon be flown by the lowest bidders. It is a serious fight, no matter at which carriers.

 

the rj does not work as llc. we tried it here with airwisky. didnt work was sent away.

 

Anybody else growing weary of the preachy nature of ryane's semi-analytical posts?

Yeah I know, don't read if you don't like it, blah blah blah...