Originally Posted by AtlCSIP (Post 1353899)

Real question here. If they reconfigure the 200's to have less than 50 seats, must they be removed? Is it possible that Pinnacle could fly 200's with 49 seats and not violate the provisions of the conditions for acquiring additional 900's?

Originally Posted by AtlCSIP (Post 1353899)

Real question here. If they reconfigure the 200's to have less than 50 seats, must they be removed? Is it possible that Pinnacle could fly 200's with 49 seats and not violate the provisions of the conditions for acquiring additional 900's?

Originally Posted by anthony210 (Post 1353691)

At this point, I doubt we are going to furlough. The company has already said no furloughs in 2013. The new CEO was in the crew room this morning and hinted that the 200s are staying much longer than anticipated along with the new 900s coming. He also said it is possible we may have to hire at some point.

Originally Posted by MunkyButtr (Post 1353817)

Correction, "50 seaters" must be removed as the 900s are added.

Originally Posted by LoudFastRules (Post 1353848)

And your management has never weaseled out of contract provisions? I'm just asking...

Originally Posted by AtlCSIP (Post 1353899)

Real question here. If they reconfigure the 200's to have less than 50 seats, must they be removed? Is it possible that Pinnacle could fly 200's with 49 seats and not violate the provisions of the conditions for acquiring additional 900's?

Originally Posted by Pro Fessional (Post 1353908)

No. It's not possible.

Originally Posted by What (Post 1353920)

I am not to versed on the Delta SCOPE, but one would think the language would read unto 50 seats or 50 seats or less. APA was burned with this already and that's how the E140 was born, built specifically for AMR as a way around SCOPE.

Originally Posted by Avroman (Post 1354052)

Pinnacle had the CRJ-440 , a 44 seat version with closets for the rest of the space. Then after the NWA bankruptcy and scope relaxing in 06 they all were converted to 50 seat CRJ-200s

Originally Posted by johnso29 (Post 1353699)

The 200s must be removed as the 900s are added.

Originally Posted by Captain Tony (Post 1354056)

Oh, you mean they bluffed you guys into taking a massive pay cut (and screwing the rest of us) after all? Say it ain't so! Enjoy that 7 year contract at the bottom of the industry.

Originally Posted by IBPilot (Post 1354068)

ahh yes more productive input from Uncle Tony, who was sitting in on the negotiations and has personally seen all the financial and planning documents and had Thanksgiving dinner with Spanjers and Anderson...

Originally Posted by Captain Tony (Post 1354069)

And? That contributed absolutely nothing to this discussion except to pump your ego by bragging that you're some union insider "big shot". Are you saying that they ARE going to furlough because the -200s ARE really leaving? Or are you just attacking me for saying something you didn't like, regardless of whether it's true or not?

Originally Posted by johnso29 (Post 1354057)

Ok, so are you implying that other 50 seat operators will be reduced instead? Or are you implying that seats can be removed and will not count as 50 seaters? If its the latter, that won't work. A 50 seater is defined as an aircraft certified for 50 or less seats and a certificated MGTOW of up to 65,000 LBS.

With the agreement in place removing Pinnacle's CRJ200s is the cleanest way to remove 50 seaters from the DCI fleet.



No. Not in my experience.




No. The definition of 50 seater aircraft won't permit that.



Correct.





We learned from that. The definition of a 50 seater is 0-50 seats. If one or more seats were removed to reduce the seat count below 50 then it's still a 50 seater.