What language do you suggest might accomplish this?

CAL had language if I'm not mistaken to say no RJ/Coex flying between hubs. Let me go look, airlinepilotcentral.com does include the pilot contracts....

look, took 3 minutes:

Continental, Section 1 (Scope) Part 4 B.
The Company will not permit Express Carrier Flying between Company Hubs. If an Express Carrier schedules a pair of successive flights of Express Carrier Flying to be operated either under a single flight number or on a single aircraft, where one flight is scheduled to originate at a Company Hub and the second flight is scheduled to terminate at a second Company Hub, the Company will impose an IATA standard schedules Information Manual Type “A” Traffic Restriction Code on the through flight which will suppress its display.

[edit: delete quote]

I'm confused. What ALPA leaders are telling anyone that this is good of "all" pilots? If anything, ALPA National has run for the hills. This is my ALPA vs their ALPA vs their ALPA vs their ALPA.

As to mainline vs. regional, as a former regional pilot and XJT at that, let me make sure whats being insinuated here, is it that mainline management is seperate from mainline pilots and the regional feeders? Hence, mainline says here is 1 million block hours and the mainline pilots and regional fight over it?

Here is the litmus test, who's contract scopes who?

We thought we had language in the UAL contract that would accomplish just that. For instance, express cannot fly between hubs. Why not stipulate the city pairs, or just say express may not fly any route that was previously flown by mainline without consent? Or mileage? There are any number of ways to write this into a contract...

For example...

1-C-1-c Feeder Flying on Company Routes
1-C-1-c-(1) A Feeder Carrier shall not initiate a new
scheduled Feeder Flying Round Trip in any Market
operated by the Company at any time in the preceding
twenty-four (24) months, unless the Company
demonstrates that a Company Round Trip that may be
initiated in the Market instead of the Feeder Flying
Round Trip would not pass the BIRR Test.
1-C-1-c-(2) The Company shall not remove a
scheduled Company Round Trip from any Market
served by Feeder Flying unless the Company
demonstrates that the Round Trip to be removed would
not pass the BIRR Test in the absence of a Feeder
Flying Round Trip scheduled to depart within thirty (30)
minutes of the Company Round Trip.

Remove a sentence or two and all is good...

Someone above said that all regional pilots owed there jobs to lost mainline jobs. I am not so that is entirely true. I first flew for AE in 1992... there were FIVE AE companies at the time... with well over 2000 pilots between them.. hell we had 1000 at "Flagship Airlines ala Nashville Eagle".... and there are what 2700 AE pilots today..... I bet the difference could be measured in hundreds not thousands as the difference in AE numbers then and now. WHAT is different is what they fly..... out of RDU the Saabs, Shorts, and J31's flew to all the little towns of NC, VA, SC .....now those pilots are flying longer routes in jets instead of those TPs....... AA/AE maybe the exception rather than the rule... It would be interesting to see if the numbers were available how many pilots flew for each legacy carrier back then and how many pilots flew for feeder carriers support that carrier back then ... and contrast that with the numbers of today.....

Also, don't forget that more and more mainline pilots as we move forward will be former regional pilots who define pulling up the ladder behind them as giving up scope, and they're not interested in doing that because they know scope concessions = furloughs. Strict scope = hiring, i.e. people below them, and movement.

And regionals have done a great job at securing good wages, benefits, schedules, and quality of life that make being a regional pilot so rewarding.

This is not for the good of all pilots. It is for the good of UAL/CAL pilots. If it helps others then great.

What gives us this right?
Planes painted in United colors
Customers buying United tickets

Let your company sell thier own tickets and operate thier own brand, let's see how that works out.

With the attitude you're displaying here I bet you really give United customers quality service. That is another reason the outsourcing should stop.

Again, outside looking in, but that idea seems better. More competition is better in my book.

It'd be suicide. They wouldn't make it more then a few years.

I don't think many are concerned about the bottom of the mainline seniority list. It's the top half that, to them, may think they have nothing to gain.