Ual/cal Scope
 

Greetings All,

So what is the SCOPE deal guys? Can UAL (since that is what will remain as a name) shove their SCOPE clause down CALs throat? Can CAL pilots veto this?

What is the recourse for this merged pilot group? Anyone with insight, thoughts, ideas?

Regards,

AA

I would suspect NO as they are agreeing to a new joint PWA. I would fight tooth and nail for that one.

Knowing that UAUA has many longer term standing FFD contracts, that may prove difficult, but they can have it in writing not to renew any of them as they become due, nor allow any new ones to be written.

CAL has proven that you do not need that feed siphoned off to make a business model work.

True - but I could the discussion in the boardroom, "but if we allow more 50 seaters, 70 seaters and even 100 seaters, we can make MORE profit that we do now".

My reading of the tea leaves - admittedly from a distance - I think the UAL concept of outsourcing is going to prevail. The airline is going to be based in Chicago, United's going to be the name, etc. etc. Those kind of choices tend to, influence other choices that are made.

Scope should be the NUMBER 1 thing that gets fixed in this whole deal.

Best of luck to the collective pilot group. I have no doubt that they will be able to improve on every aspect of the Delta contract...scope, QOL and pay. The contrast between the DAL/NWA merger and US/AW is all the leverage the pilot group needs. Lets hope it also means the return of those currently out of work.

For the sake of all the pilots at major carriers, I hope so.

The problem is that because of the existing contracts at United, it's unlikely that they will reduce the number or size of airplanes that are permitted (I don't know how the UAL pilot's scope clause is written). I'd be concerned that United will want to apply their scope to CAL's operation with the result being some serious layoffs and parking of airplanes on the CAL side.

So can we gert a recap of scope clauses between the two?

Is CAL still at max 59 seats for RJs and 70 seats for turboprops?

And what is the cap on jets?

CAL's scope looks awesome now, not so awesome a decade ago but hey, works now.

Think CAL has a 50 seat jet cap and no turbo prop limit

A tight line to walk.

It would seem that the pilots (both groups) should join together to let everyone know they'll make it as difficult as possible for the executives to pull this off unless scope is satisfactorily resolved.

Not sure if the fatcats can bypass this issue to their benefit or not though.

I think it is unrealistic to expect scope to be tightened to CAL's standards. It is what every pilot wants, but it would be far too costly to cancel the 70 seat contracts with RAH, GoJet, Skywest, etc.

What I would like to see is the 70+ seat fleet capped where it is at and then a deal worked out where 100 seaters go to mainline. Even that though would be hard to pull off.

Best of luck to CAL/UAL pilots.