Scope starts to rear it’s head...
 

A number of major airline contracts regulate scope by a comparison if regional block hours to total mainline block hours or to total mainline block hours of certain categories of flying (typically narrow bodies). Some have provisions with multiple triggers for scope reduction, triggered by Flying done the previous year.

A few airlines are already hitting these triggering provisions. From airline geeks:

https://i.ibb.co/0fDb70g/E3378-CFE-B...C939-BD708.jpg

Except most managements are claiming force make ire and basically disregarding scope provisions until a mediator says other wise

Now that the LOA is in effect at United, their regionals will see flying reduced from 120% mainline NB block using a rolling 12 month average to a month to month reduction of less than 100% of mainline NB block hours. Prior to COVID, the scope restrictions on the 70/76 seaters kept the regional flying below the 100% mark when mainline was flying a full schedule. In the last few months, regional block hours have far exceeded the 120% limit on a month to month basis, while still in compliance with the 12 month look back. Now, for the duration of the LOA, the regional block hours will have to be reduced, mainline NB block hours increased, or some combination that will keep regional block hours below mainline NB block.

Force majeur claims would be very difficult to sell to a mediator given that there are a number of airlines operating with no affiliates regional airline codeshares AT ALL. And with members on furlough and decreased ALV and guarantee, you can be damn sure that the major airline unions will be fighting tooth and nail to enforce theIr own contract scope provisions for the benefit of their own members.

That's cute.

This is going to go way beyond that. Mesa is starting to fly 737's for regional pay rates. AA is farming out domestic flying to Jetblue and Alaska.

The whipsaw is going to hit mainline. It already exists in Europe and Asia. Lufthansa had/has a regional flying A340's trans Atlantic.

And Horizon has no scope limits whatsoever.

You can kiss this profession goodbye if/when NB scope goes to regionals

Quoted for truth. If this happens, better start working on plans C, D, E and F because if that happens, this industry won't be worth the money/time/qol invested into it.

just for clairty, Mesa is flying 737 cargo planes for pay rates comparable to other ACMI 737 operators. While the scales are not great CA pay does get above $200/ hr. It’s not mainline NB pay but appears to be comparable to what their competitors pay.


AA is using B6 and Alaska to expand in markets where AA does not have a strong foothold and place their codes on flights on the other two airlines on routes they already operate. What is happening there is a simple codeshare and not anything close to a regional style system for flying NBs. Considering AA, B6, and Alaska all pay within about 5% of each other for 12 year CAs, I don’t think that is really detrimental to the industry like a wave of bigger jets at the regionals.

The 100% month of scope may actually be looser than the 120% 12 mo look back going forward if there is some continued recovery. They won’t have to use March/April/May 2020’s dismal numbers to calculate it.

The unions wouldn't let them do that to us

Shouldn't you be plotting to kidnap a governor somewhere?

Prior to COVID regional block ran 85-90% of mainline block. UAX was scoped out on the big rj’s, and the company really didn’t want that many 50 seaters, but scope left them the choice of more mainline, or more 50 seaters. In the last 4-5 months express has been flying way over 120% because of the history of being under 100%. With mainline greatly reduced, express will have to stay below mainline NB block until the LOA terminates. United will maximize the use of the bigger rj’s, and this could alter the timeline for the reduction of the 50 seaters. Until United is running a full schedule, UAX will be given less flying. If they have to make a decision to reduce 70 seat hours (all 76 seat jets have to be converted to 70 while mainline is on reduced work) or 50 seat flying, my money says that it is the 50 seat fleet that takes the biggest hit. If this LOA is short lived, UAX could go back to what it was, if this drags on, the company will likely permanently alter the fleet mix and retire the 756 and all but a few 50 seaters. Grab a beer and pop some popcorn, it should be an interesting show. The carnage isn’t over yet.

I agree up to a point.

The only variable that I don't know about is when the slot program at several major airports resumes. With reduced traffic, it's cheaper to run a 50 seat flight on a route that you have no interest in flying than a 70 seater. Especially if you're using the 70 seaters on profitable routes.

I don’t know what the route structure will look like and how much it will change. We may stop flying 6 flights a day from a hub to LHR in a 767 and run 4 in a 777. We could stop running 6 flights a day on a 175 and run 4 in a 319 or 737-700. We may stop serving very small towns like CLL or HYS. We could end up back to where we were, or with reduced frequency on bigger planes and give up unneeded slots. There will probably be a difference in the near term, and post recovery as well. This could easily accelerate the phase out of different fleets. Just like 9/11 got rid of 727’s, DC-10’s, and most turboprops, this could be the gas on the fire that accelerates how both the legacy and regional fleets change. I really don’t see any older fleet at the legacies or regionals as something that stands a good chance of being here in several years. My money is on an airline industry that looks different than what it did a year ago.

Fuel costs post 9/11 got rid of many older airframes. When oil is 100+ a barrel, it's hard to justify flying an inefficient airplane vs buying a nice new A320/737 that's efficient. Might as well wonder why there's no 737 classics in anyone's fleet.

Airframes get cheaper to operate and larger over time, but the same hub and spoke ideas continue on. Ask United how giving up slots and space at JFK and LGA are working out for them. Unless the airlines absolutely need to save cash to survive, they'll need those slots long term and filling them with cheap packing peanut flights allows the airlines to hold onto those valuable slots.

SWA, F9, and NK are FIGHTING for those gates and slots, in the case of NK quite literally. They have a longstanding court case going over some slots in EWR.

https://www.courthousenews.com/spiri...k-airport/amp/

All three of the Big Three are going to be downsized. They’ve said that. All three have reduced the number of types of aircraft in their fleets. While this pandemic has been a disaster for everyone it is certainly less damaging to the LCC/ULCC crowd, h€||, Allegiant is planning on BUYING aircraft while they are so cheap.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...argains-abound


So yeah, very different indeed.

You are right about the fuel cost being a huge driving force that isn’t there right now. The market is also going to be full of deals on used mainline sized planes for a while and both the used and new markets will have some deals. I still see big changes in the next few years. The 756 is getting old. The Max and 321 orders will take care of the 757 fleet, but there really isn’t a 767 replacement that they like. The 787 is a great machine, but expensive. On the regional side, both 50 seat fleets are aging as well, there isn’t a replacement, and there are only so many 700’s to convert into 550’s. Since scope is maxed out and a good sized chunk of the regional fleet is getting really old with no real replacement option, coupled with how unpopular they are with our customers, the regional side of the house will probably be seeing changes in the next few years as well. Kirby has said that he will be looking for opportunities and weaknesses in our competition as we come out of this. U-ALPA has dug in its heels on enhancing scope protections, not eroding them. United could get more 175’s and improve the regional product by adding a new NB mainline fleet, but so far they aren’t interested in that option. It should be an interesting show.

AA’s deal with Jetblue and Alaska essentially bypasses scope altogether. This leaves United and Delta without a date, but makes
you wonder if they could bring back TED and Song...

Hub and spoke works until it doesn’t. Until business and international flying rebounds, flying in the hubs is going to be way down. And while yes, the Big Three have long used their regionals to occupy gates so they could lock competitors out of a hub but unlike Alaska, they all do have scope clauses and for most of these cutbacks in NB aircraft flying will cause a cutback in allowed Regional flying as well. And the Big Three right now are sort of in survival mode - they really can’t afford it. Both Delta and United have recently released financial reports and they are still bleeding money. American has debt of over $40 BILLION and it is increasing every day. Sure, if the pax are there they could and would do it - right up to the scope limits - but right now the pax aren’t there and they don’t have the money to defend many gates or slots they can’t economically utilize.

Addendum to above:

https://thepointsguy.com/news/budget...ring-pandemic/

All UAX E175's are now blocked to 70 pax, plan your commute accordingly.

The planes aren’t full right now anyway. When one of the LOA’s termination triggers is met the seats will go back in, unless a deep furlough were to terminate the deal. Also, when the LOA terminates, the current scope restrictions will be terminated as well and we go back to the original language restricting UAX block to 120% with the look back. I did see that United had to reduce UAX block for November and increase United block to be compliant with the LOA scope restrictions.

I find it ironic that pulling seats out only ends up screwing over all the mainline commuters. Especially now that most flights I've flown are full or nearly full and what once was being flown by a mainline jet has been replaced by a regional jet.

Ya. They should have wrote in “seats may stay in and used by commuting pilots only”..

What????Blasphemy. You can't possibly have a mainline pilot group and a regional pilot group working together for the benefit of all.

Your suggestion makes way to much sense and would require teamwork between unions, a trait that seems few and far between.

United’s new scope restrictions are not limited to the duration of the LOA. They are permanent changes, just like all other contractual gains that are part of the LOA. The only temporary parts are hour reductions.

Routes with no interest will be terminated.

even the 76 seaters to 70 seaters?


EDIT I see hedley’s post below

You might want to read the LOA again. Additional UAX restrictions, rate protection, displacement cancellations, guaranteed COLA’s, and work reductions are temporary and only in effect while the LOA is active. Section L lists the permanent gains such as FC deadhead, improvements to reserve bidding, LTD increase, and pay raise. Scope isn’t under that section. When the LOA terminates, scope and the seat restrictions go back to the original language and only the listed permanent gains remain.

You’re right, thanks for the correction.

Can you say that one more time? I’ve been married going on 25 years and I don’t get to hear that I was right very often. 😁

Let me know how that goes when the slot programs resume next year. Sorry guys, we totally gave away our EWR/ORD slots because we needed to save pennies and be profitable 3 months earlier than if we had kept those slots.

It happened before when the 19 seaters were phased out, and it could happen again due to low demand caused by the virus, or through the eventual phase out of the 50 seat fleet. We don’t know how things will look post COVID. The legacies could decide that protecting a slot with a little plane on an unprofitable route makes long term sense, or they could let routes go like they have in the past. They could also go for reduced frequency on larger aircraft, which reduces the demand for slots. Either way, we’re just along for the ride.

Could United buy a beech 1900 and have it ping pong EWR-ABE 10 times a day to hold slots?

They could do anything that they want, but they’d still be paying for the slots. If they think that spending that money is worth keeping those slots for future use, or just to keep the competition from getting them, they will. If they feel that dropping certain markets, changing equipment and frequency, or letting slots go makes more sense, they may do that too. When the turboprops were phased out for the 50 seat jets, some markets were dropped, some grew due to improved service, and some remained unchanged. The same thing will happen going forward. If during and after the recovery the airlines see a value in 50 seat jets to service small communities or to protect slots, they’ll keep them around until they just wear out, if they see more value somewhere else, the decision on when to retire them could be accelerated.