Well actually 50% of the domestic market but.... That 50% requires many more airplanes, which means more pilots, to carry the same number of revenue seat miles.
At current growth rates in 2000, small jet pilots would have exceeded mainline pilot numbers in 2005. ALPA would have had a revolution since the democratic process would put the power in the Connection and Express's of the world. (And as we have agreed, ALPA Democracy has no limits - it is MOB RULE. Well ALPA does not want the wrong Mob to get control)
We have argued and I think proven, that scope constraints are not helpful for the mainline pilot. Airlines without scope constraints have grown faster that airline with tight scope. (CO,DL,AA v/s U, UAL) So if scope does not benefit the mainline pilot, why was it ALPA's #1 negotiating push? CONTROL
This is why ALPA is pushing scope. It is not about protecting and promoting mainline pilot careers. It is about control.
Scope is simply small jet pilot birth control. It is ALPA's attempts to keep them from being born and aborting the ones already conceived.
Read this report prepared for the IACP and see if you disagree with my economic analysis. Of course, this was developed independently of the RJDC, but now we have APA, IACP and the RJDC all reaching the same economic conclusions.
http://www.spamhouse.org/sterileboydreport.zip
http://www.spamhouse.org/sterileboydreport.pdf
What ALPA is missing (aside from any economic reality) is that another way to control the small jet pilots is to put them on one list, meaning one MEC. By inclusion, instead of exclusion, the mainline pilots could regain control, become more powerful, and restore the union . It is a shame that arrogance and greed is all that stands between all pilots standing together as one union.