So accepting the TA makes the leases go away? If they are going to accept trade ins for regionally flown 900s, I'm sure they would accept trade ins for mainline flown 900s also and they would probably make an even better trade in deal for new c-series. Also nothing says they can't keep similar or the same scope while offering better money to sell out quickly to continue on with their new business plan. I refuse to believe you don't have any more leverage to do better and to do it quickly instead of the traditional route of negotiations if the company indeed really wants this new business plan. If they don't REALLY want it now, why would they offer "improvements" before they even have to come to the table for anything? You CAN do better and you won't have to wait years to do it. You just have to stand together to get it. Giving up scope and profit sharing and offering too work more (staff more effectively/ hire less) to make it cost neutral just shouldn't be "good enough". Please raise the bar well beyond "cost neutral" if you are going to sell scope.
Apparently that is why we are doing this 7 months early. There is an opportunity with the manufacturers, and that is why they were willing to do this. Could they wait longer? I don't know. They apparently had two plans, to do this with us and get it done now, or to wait for normal section 6 negotiations (which could take a couple years---normal negotiations), and keep the 50 seat RJs for years with unbreakable leases. This was a deal with the manufacturers and the company supposedly. If they kept the RJs and had the leases, I suspect they would have used money for upkeep on those same planes instead of giving raises in the TA.
As far as allowing mainline to fly new -900s, that has been discussed at length. The regional lift is CHEAP. There is NO WAY mainline can beat that cost. Trying to do that would be complex, and if the pilots only did it, who would the other crew members be? If they were mainline, it would be prohibitively expensive. Regional contracts are constantly under review, and it seems the lowest cost wins the feed.
Also, when you have "leverage" you have to know what is going on. Is there something else besides the RJ trade up? Nobody really knows, or can say legally. (signed documents) In order to have leverage, you need to be sure you know what is going on.
As far as compensation goes, we just got a 4% raise on Jan 1st of this year, as the last yearly raise of our current 4 year contract. Now we are offered a TA that is 7 months early, with a 4% signing bonus (so 8% so far for the year), and then another 8.5% on Jan 1st of next year, one day after the normal ammendable date. Not bad. That means from Jan 1st of this year to Jan 1st of next year, we will have gotten a 16.5% raise, with two more 3% raises to go. It means cash in the pocket instead of waiting on the NMB to help with mediation, and two years of that. UAL has gone on for years with zilch since their merger with CAL. NOTHING.
Again, the NMB met with the MEC and told them a year ago that pattern bargaining WILL happen, but only with UA/AA/US. They also said the average time to bargain with mediation was over 2 years. There are many improvements in the TA, not only pay and scope. And, it lasts 3 years.
Remember, to have leverage, you need to know exactly what you are up against. If it is just a guess, then it becomes a gamble.
Bye Bye---General Lee
