There is a copy of UAL CBA on APC.. It's on page 16 of the PDF file

When has Airline MGT come to Mainline Pilot groups (especially in the last 5 years) and asked if they wanted to fly 50 seaters? If that were true, Why did all the MGT's want to void SCOPE clauses? Heck, if MGT offered these jets to mainline, we wouldn't need SCOPE clauses.

Please enlighten me because I don't know of any.

AMR use to fly BAE-146's (from Air Cal) and Fokker 100's. MGT parked them, I doubt seriously the APA wanted to get rid of them. Now I might agree that the Unions of the legacies didn't want 75.00/hr Capts.

Piedmont flew to fly the F-28 and the Martin
USAir flew the BAC 146 (after buying out PSA) and BAC-11's and Fokker 100's
MGT parked them and the Regionals are are flying them.

NWA flew the DC-9-10....

Do you really think the Unions didn't want these airplanes?
I'll admit ALPA might have made an error in not fighting harder to keep these on Mainline lists. It might have required a concessionary hourly rate during Booming ecomomic times, which would not have been popular. This of course is all 20/20 hindsight. I bet all of us wishes that the RJs currently flying under the express banners where all flying under the Mainline Banners instead.

When things are good, the push for legacy pilots is bigger and bigger jets, to get a higher hourly rate. I'd love to fly an A-380 or 747-400/800, but then again I'd Fly the FedEx Cessna Caravan as long as it paid well.

Re-read the post. The manufactures went to the majors first in the early 90's, management at the majors did bite into it, but the pilot groups didn't. Of course no one knew at the time that 10-12 years later half of the domestic feed was going to be on "regional jets", but it is a reality.

It really doesn't matter anymore, the damage is done, and all that's left at most legacies is a not-so-visible line that management was able to push in the name of 9/11, hence, the 70-90 seaters.

...and yet the unions approved it at the guise of saving their pensions...which were lost anyway on the ones that gave up scope...Dee-dow!!

Just pulled out my handy-dandy '02 CAL Contract. :rolleyes:

Part 3 Scope (C) The company will not directly or through an affiliate establish any new airline which operates aircraft other than small jets and small turboprops...

Part 2 Definitions (Y) "Small Jet" means jet aircraft with FAA certification of fifty (50) seats or fewer.

Part 2 Definitions (Z) "Small Turboprop" means turboprop aircraft with FAA certification of seventy-nine (79) or fewer seats.

Hence the reason CAL can put Q400's into EWR.

the q400 is going to suck in Newark. It is a good idea granted but the operator sucks, there is no where to park it with its comparatively large wingspan, the port authority doesnt like the idea and had previously banned turboprops (except grandfather clause), I also don't see it utilizing 11/29 anymore then it already is, and the pilots are getting paid less then the baggage handlers.... somebody forgot to plan this one out. this is a step backward for the industry. I definitely see the need for the Q it is a great airplane but it should be flown by mainline or for at least respectable rates.

Yeah colgan pilots dropped the ball and picked up these enormous turboprops that pinnacle bought for them. Another reason Colgan needs to get ALPA... get some decent rates... gosh!