New Scope and Code Share limits
 

So I can't find the info wading through all the other threads for this info so.....

What is the limits on UAX flying as well as code share limits? The 900sm limit applies to what percentage of UAX flying as well, what is the percentage of hub-hub for UAX? What about the "new narrow body" language and what would that mean?

Off the top of my head:

UAX limits are based on domestic narrow body block hours and a declining ratio based on increase of large RJs. The limit is 120% and if I recall the union roadshow correctly they are currently at 118% (?).

No more than 20% of the UAX flying can be over 900SM. The remaining 80% must be less than this distance (FYI 900SM = 782NM).

UAX hub-to-hub flying is limited to 5% of the block hours. At the TA roadshow, the union said currently UAX is at 4%.

What about the new narrow body language? If the company wants to increase the number of 76-seat airframes above the designated number, they will have to order a new small narrow body aircraft for mainline to fly.

What are the limits on domestic code share? What's to stop a regional from becoming a code share partner and flying 100 seaters as a domestic code share and not UAX to get around scope?

1-C-2 Domestic Code Share Agreements
The Company or a Company Affiliate may enter into or maintain a Code Sharing Agreement with Domestic Code Share Carriers that permit such carriers to apply the Company’s Designator Code to their operations only in accordance with this Section 1-C-2. For purposes of this Section 1-C-2, Flights conducted by Affiliates of the Domestic Code Share Carrier or United Express Carriers under agreement with and under the Designator Code of the Domestic Air Carrier shall be considered Flights conducted by that Domestic Air Carrier to the extent they are conducted pursuant to the applicable Domestic Code Sharing Agreement.
1-C-2-a The Company may maintain the existing Domestic Code Sharing Agreements with i) US Airways (in accordance with Letter of Agreement LOA 17), and ii) Great Lakes, Gulfstream/Silver Airways, and Cape Air, provided the Domestic Air Carriers listed in ii) of this Section 1-C-2-a only operate Regional Aircraft.
1-C-2-b The Company may enter into or maintain Domestic Code Sharing Agreements for flight operations between airports within Alaska and Hawaii.
1-C-2-c The Company may maintain and enter into additional Domestic Code Sharing Agreements with Domestic Code Share Carriers subject to the following restrictions:
1-C-2-c-(1) Hub to Hub Flights
The Company shall not permit Domestic Code Share Flying between Company Hubs or to or from a Company Hub unless such Flying is between a Company Hub and the applicable Domestic Code Share Carrier’s Hub. The number of ASMs of code sharing flying conducted by the Domestic Code Share Carrier from the Company’s Hubs to the Domestic Code Share Carrier’s Hubs cannot exceed the Domestic Code Share Carrier Hub ASM Ratio (as defined below):
For each Domestic Code Share Carrier, a ratio (the “Domestic Code Share Carrier Hub ASM Ratio”) will be determined by dividing the number of ASMs of all Hub to Hub Flights (i.e., between the applicable Domestic Code Share Carrier’s Hubs and Company Hubs) scheduled to be operated by such Domestic Code Share Carrier on aircraft other than Regional Aircraft by the number of domestic ASMs of all Hub to Hub Flights scheduled to be operated by the Company during the twelve (12) full calendar months immediately prior to the effective date of the Domestic Code Sharing Agreement with the Domestic Code Share Carrier. The last day of the twelve-month period shall be the “Ratio Date” with respect to such Domestic Code Share Carrier.
For each Rolling Twelve-Month Period measured each calendar month (with the first measurement occurring the twelfth (12th) calendar month after the Ratio Date), the ratio between the number of domestic ASMs of Hub to Hub Flights scheduled by the Domestic Code Share Carrier bearing the Company’s Designator Code and the number of ASMs of Hub to Hub Flights scheduled by the Company bearing the Domestic Code Share Carrier’s designator code (the “Schedule Ratio”) shall not exceed 120% of the Domestic Code Share Carrier Hub ASM Ratio.
1-C-2-c-(2) System Flights
The number of ASMs in flights conducted by the Domestic Code Share Carrier carrying the Company’s code may not exceed the Domestic Code Share Carrier ASM Ratio (as defined below):
For each Domestic Code Share Carrier, a ratio (the “Domestic Code Share Carrier ASM Ratio”) will be determined by dividing the number of ASMs scheduled to be operated by the Domestic Code Share Carrier in aircraft other than Regional Aircraft by the number of ASMs of all flights scheduled to be operated by the Company during the twelve (12) full calendar months immediately prior to the effective date of the Code Share Agreement with the Domestic Code Share Carrier. The last day of the applicable twelve (12) month period shall be the “Ratio Date” with respect to such Domestic Code Share Carrier.
For each Rolling Twelve-Month Period measured each calendar month (with the first (1st) measurement occurring the twelfth (12th) calendar month after the Ratio Date), the ratio between the number of ASMs of Domestic Code Sharing Agreement Flights scheduled by the Domestic Code Share Carrier bearing the Company’s designator code in aircraft other than Regional Aircraft and the number of ASMs of Domestic Code Sharing Agreement Flights scheduled by the Company bearing the Domestic Code Share Carrier’s designator code (the “Domestic Code Share Carrier Schedule Ratio”) shall not exceed 115% of the Domestic Code Share Carrier ASM Ratio. For example, if the Domestic Code Share Carrier ASM Ratio is 1.5 (i.e., the Domestic Code Share Carrier had fifty percent (50%) more scheduled ASMs in aircraft other than Regional Aircraft than the Company in the measurement period), then the number of ASMs scheduled to be operated by the Domestic Code Share Carrier bearing the Company’s Designator Code in aircraft other than Regional Aircraft may not be more than 1.725 times the number of ASMs scheduled to be operated by the Company bearing the Domestic Code Share Carrier’s Designator Code. As a further example, if the Domestic Code Share Carrier ASM Ratio is 0.5 (i.e., the Domestic Code Share Carrier has one-half (1/2) of the scheduled ASMs of the Company in the measurement period in aircraft other than Regional Aircraft), then the number of ASMs scheduled to be operated by the Domestic Code Share Carrier bearing the Company’s Designator Code in such aircraft may not be more than 0.575 times the number of ASMs scheduled to be operated by the Company bearing the Domestic Code Share Carrier’s Designator Code.
The provisions of this Section 1-C-2-c-(2) shall have been satisfied in connection with a Domestic Code Sharing Agreement with a Domestic Code Share Carrier that at the time operates fewer than one-half (1/2) of the number of ASMs operated by the Company, if the number of ASMs of Domestic Code Sharing Agreement Flights scheduled by the Domestic Code Share Carrier bearing the Company’s Designator Code equals no more than 125% of the number of ASMs of Domestic Code Share Flights scheduled by the Company bearing the Domestic Code Share Carrier’s Designator Code.

According to the above Skywest or any other regional would first have to create a domestic airline with its own reservation system and create hubs in that system for United to codeshare with them.

Good. Glad there is some protection from code share/scope breaking. Some of our guys are salivating about getting bigger planes to fly as a code share. I for one don't want to fly at a regional all my life.

Skywest or any regional, for that matter would have to create their own ASM's for UA to share their code on. Right now all the ASM's that Skywest flies are United and DAL ASM's.

And Us Air, and American......and Alaska.

Correct, sorry I forgot a couple:)

Skywest wouldn't have to create a reservation system as they have recently bought an airline that already has one on the shelf, ready to be used again. They also bought this airline with approval and in very close coordination with CAL management. Skywest has an order for 100 MRJs with deliveries beginning in 2017 (and options for 100 more). Maybe its just a coincidence? I honestly don't know.

Very true, we will all have to wait and see how this pans out, but to answer the original question we do have protections against domestic codeshare. Maybe Skywest will fill the void of US Air when they merge with AA and join One World. A codeshare would also have to create a route stucture, hubs, and passengers. You couldn't just take the current RJ route structure and substitute 100 seaters and call it a code share.

Doesn't 1-C-2-a (i already cover that?

Yes, but if us air goes away via AA the loa covering USAir goes away with them.

Well, I wouldn't bet the scope section on it.

Nevets is on to something.. SkyWest also has its own old reservation system ready to go... And apparently so does Expressjet so now they have two.. Anyone seriously believes Skywest would place a firm order for 100 new planes without a plan on where to park them?

303

Shouldn't you have known the answer to these questions BEFORE you voted yes on the TA?

2017 is a long time in airline years especially with an aircraft that hasn't flown yet.

You don't think they plan that far out? The CALEX IPO was in 2002 but CAL management had the this whole thing planned out to sell off the rest of XJT. They pulled every single lever they wrote into the CPA they wrote with a cost plus agreement in order to get he highest share price. At every single date written in the CPA, CAL management pulled the trigger up until the buy out of XJT by SKY, including the $9 million they paid SKY for their due diligence the first time around CAL used them to whipsaw XJT into a losing CPA and the brink if BK.

I think you are putting to much faith in hope. There is a long term strategic plan. We just don't know what it is yet.