Just did a quick run through of the fleet term sheet. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but here's how the needle has moved.
Pre concession, per the fleet agreement, the company could 'express' any location they chose. Fleet had the right to work any a/c with 69 or more seats. The limiting factor to 'expression' was the public wanted less, not more props, and ALPA's scope clause.
Now that scope clause has been removed. U can 'express' itself at will. Fleet mainline has no right to that work, not even 70 seat RJ's - the new 'express' language is in the latest agreement for a reason.
Results: In the near future, assuming survival, all stations, save hubs, focus cities, and the long distance locations (SEA, LAX, etc.) can be 'expressed' at will by U. And in the hub and focus cities, 'express' agents, not mainline, will work those flights. Has the company shared it's intentions with the union in this area? Are the savings obtained in the latest round of concessions based on X number of furloughs under this scenario?
At the end of 2003, I think we will have the same number of ALPA/AFA employees as we do now. We will have far fewer agents.
Or am I missing something?
Pre concession, per the fleet agreement, the company could 'express' any location they chose. Fleet had the right to work any a/c with 69 or more seats. The limiting factor to 'expression' was the public wanted less, not more props, and ALPA's scope clause.
Now that scope clause has been removed. U can 'express' itself at will. Fleet mainline has no right to that work, not even 70 seat RJ's - the new 'express' language is in the latest agreement for a reason.
Results: In the near future, assuming survival, all stations, save hubs, focus cities, and the long distance locations (SEA, LAX, etc.) can be 'expressed' at will by U. And in the hub and focus cities, 'express' agents, not mainline, will work those flights. Has the company shared it's intentions with the union in this area? Are the savings obtained in the latest round of concessions based on X number of furloughs under this scenario?
At the end of 2003, I think we will have the same number of ALPA/AFA employees as we do now. We will have far fewer agents.
Or am I missing something?