That's what I gathered as well.

I'm 100% in the same camp as you on the NO Vote. If the T/A is ping-ponged back to the MEC's to tell the JNC 'thanx, but no thanx'.....not only is that going to send a tall glass of "Shut the **** up" to Jeff and company regarding us giving into SCOPE, but as you said, it will buy time under the present provision set forth under the current CAL-CBA regarding RJ/Outsourcing of further flying.

Regardless of all the games Mgt is playing, stand tight on SCOPE.....that's the corner stone for us ALL.

One would hope the latitude they are hoping for is never even put into a T/A knowing the answer would be NO.

Again, one can hope. Should the T/A come out with such language, I hope everyone will vote NO. Domestic and Int'l outsourcing and JV's need to be ended or constrained to the maximum extent possible. Otherwise, any "gains" will be negated in the future.

My 2 cents,
Lee

I'm not clear on this. Are they allowed to fly 70 seat jets in IAH come Jan. under the current contracts or is the only way they can operate 70 seaters in IAH is with a new contract or scope relief from the CAL pilots?

Thanks for the info.

And it was Mr. Smisek who supposedly said to our MEC, "You don't get everything that you want."

Very true, Jeff. But you don't always get everything you want either.

Hope you guys can hold on to scope. But if they decide to violate scope, ALPA will have to go to court to get an injunction (or you can try a sick out like APA did). Most judges will say: " This is RLA stuff--it's not my gig" and send it to an arbitrator.

If your luck with arbitrators is as good as APA's has been, ALPA will lose. Better to get the big $$$ and settle on scope with as much job protection as you can get. JMHO

Still cutting costs.

"Starting Thursday, employees booking positive-space business travel through employeeRES will see the “flight value,” or the approximate cost to United, for each flight. Like the calorie count on a restaurant menu, this information is there to help you make good choices."

APC225,

Short question - you've brought back and posted to several threads that are around 4 years old. Is there a motive for doing this?

There aren't any UAL/CAL Merger threads older than 4 years?

The answer is it doesn't matter the seat count if your parent company can fly an unlimited number of airplanes in a "code share" arrangement, as well as Q-400 turboprops that can carry 78 people, I would call a much bigger hole than a limited number of 70 seat jets.

At least the CAL scope rep at the EWR roadshow was gushing over the new scope saying that it filled numerous holes in CALs scope contract and the 50 seat limit they were going to lose at the next contract negotiation. PERIOD.

So please get over pointing out the selective pieces of the old CAL scope because the new one is better for the combined airline than the old ones were for the legacy ones. Don't believe me, call your legacy scope expert and ask them.

No reason. Just looking at old threads and seeing connections to current events.