FLYnMONKEYS
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2002
- Posts
- 115
"It amazes me that furloughed mainline pilots think that scope based on revenue seat miles, or block hours, works at all... "
Right now it is working at AA. That 70 seat RJ is very close to the size of a B717. So AA gets rid of the 717 and gets rid of the pilots who fly it. Why? Because Eagle pilots can give them a plane with 30% less seat at 1/3 the labor costs.
It makes me mad but it makes sense. If they can get someone to do it cheaper then it's a good move for the shareholders. But wait, what's this? Ah yes, the scope clause. It stops AMR from outsourcing AA flights while AA's pilots are on the bench. Is it fair? Works for me, and I'm sure the junior man still working thinks so. If this scope wasn't in place AMR would outsource all of the small market flying to Eagle and even more AA pilots would be on the street.
It sucks that anyone has to take this on the chin. I already have. But it is my belief that if Eagle wants to add to the Cap they need to do it with furloughed AA/TWA pilots flying the jets.
Right now it is working at AA. That 70 seat RJ is very close to the size of a B717. So AA gets rid of the 717 and gets rid of the pilots who fly it. Why? Because Eagle pilots can give them a plane with 30% less seat at 1/3 the labor costs.
It makes me mad but it makes sense. If they can get someone to do it cheaper then it's a good move for the shareholders. But wait, what's this? Ah yes, the scope clause. It stops AMR from outsourcing AA flights while AA's pilots are on the bench. Is it fair? Works for me, and I'm sure the junior man still working thinks so. If this scope wasn't in place AMR would outsource all of the small market flying to Eagle and even more AA pilots would be on the street.
It sucks that anyone has to take this on the chin. I already have. But it is my belief that if Eagle wants to add to the Cap they need to do it with furloughed AA/TWA pilots flying the jets.