Granted, I'm a bit of a noob, but section 1 appears to be useless. I don't really see anything there to keep airplanes at ASA if JA really wants to move them.
What's the real point here?
Section 1 is not useless or worthless! However, it does not give total or a large degree of protection! No scope language is perfect!
It seems to protect jobs of the pilots on the seniority list at date of signing by giving a no furlough clause--maybe a placebo at best!
It seems to restrict wholesale transfer of airplanes without at least some remedy. This will not prohibit transfer, but there are transfer limits defined by an exact number of planes. Otherwise, the fragmentation part becomes a factor.
The labor costs of operating the 70 did not increase to a point to justify transfer. Transfer cost money as stated in one of their previous financial statments. There seems to be no economic incentive to transfer. Any new planes assigned to ASA will not be flown by topped out crews, so average crew costs would decrease. That is an incentive to add more 700 or 900's.
If Inc. wants to transfer, it will be for other than economic reasons. They are having trouble hiring also. The want to make money.
The Scope is not worthless, but it is not eutopia. Combined with competitive costs, ASA should be safe and see increases in equipment!
Scope costs negotiating capital. We don't need ironclad, restrictive scope, if we have competitive costs. Scope is like insurance. It is risk sharing. If you want to reduce your risk to ZERO, then sign a 15 year contract for Mesa minus 10%.
ASA must be safe. SH has been telling people that he had two other job offers, and he chose to stay here because he thinks things are looking up.
Early settlers used dogs as a first and last line of defense to the threats of natives and wild animals. When they heard the dogs howl, occasioanlly run, and sometimes die, they knew they had something to worry about. I'll wait for the howl, or departure before I get worried.
