Explicit, enforceable scope language is the keystone of a collective bargaining agreement: Indeed, an agreement that fails to prohibit or severely restrict an employer from outsourcing its operations can render any economic and quality of life gains meaningless. An old proverb is especially applicable to the importance of robust scope language: “If you let a camel get his nose under the tent, soon the whole animal will be inside.”

Consider the scope language contained within the 1998 Collective Bargaining Agreement. Described as very weak and full of discretionary loopholes, the language included various exceptions, the most disconcerting of which provided that NetJets International pilots would complete all flight operations in current and future Gulfstream aircraft. Such a loophole may be viewed as the camel’s nose under the NJA pilots’ tent as it permitted NetJets flying – as well as pilot jobs – to be outsourced. Professional aviators need only look at their colleagues at major airlines to assess the risks posed by outsourcing. By allowing the camel’s nose in, their tents are now filled with camels.

As NJASAP and the Company begin the process of integrating NJA and NJI operations into a single transportation system, it is appropriate to reflect on the emphasis past and present Union leaders have placed on securing comprehensive scope language as well as how the absence of scope protections has led to the widespread erosion of flying opportunities once guaranteed to the men and women who fly for the nation’s mainline carriers.

Scope and the NJA Pilot Group
The Strong Union Leadership Slate assumed management of the pilot group in 2004 amid efforts to negotiate a successor agreement. The newly elected Master Executive Council quickly introduced their bargaining goals branded as The 6S Strategy. Securing scope protections were chief among the council’s 6S goals as an all encompassing scope clause defines the flight operations that will be covered by the agreement; more simply, scope clauses are a contract’s job protection language.

Contractual scope language can be used to create job security in one of two ways: It can significantly restrict the amount of flying available to other parties, or it can specifically prohibit flight operations be conducted by any pilot not included on the applicable seniority list. Labor organizations representing pilots employed by the nation’s legacy carriers chose the less restrictive language, which, over a period of time, has allowed small loopholes to expand into gaping cavities that have resulted in extensive outsourcing.

An effective scope clause captures all of a company’s flying, ensuring the collective bargaining unit retains the rights to all flight operations and preventing the employer from diverting flying jobs to other, non-Union pilot groups. To reiterate, premium pay, benefits and work rules are worthless if the contract fails to ensure all flight operations are completed by the pilots covered by the agreement.

The Erosion of Scope Protections
The subsequent review of how diminished scope language has dramatically blurred the line between regional, formerly commuter, airlines and the majors is not intended as an indictment of the pilots who fly in the service of the same. Rather, it is intended to demonstrate the extent to which lax scope protections can detrimentally impact airline pilots. It also presents a learning opportunity for NJASAP leaders who can study the choices made by fellow labor organizations to determine how to best craft and achieve rigorous scope protections.

In 1989, Bombardier officially launched the Canadair Regional Jet Program. That same year, Embraer introduced the ERJ-145 at the Paris Air Show. The introduction of regional jet aircraft essentially changed the face of commercial airline travel: Prior to their introduction, a distinction was made between commuter airline flying and major airline flying. Commuter airlines, already an exception to scope protections, flew short legs in 12- to 70-seat turboprop aircraft, connecting small cities to larger airports. The majors, in contrast, flew longer segments in heavier jet aircraft, carrying more passengers between larger markets. In the 1980s and early 1990s, working at a commuter airline was considered a stepping stone to the major airlines from which pilots hoped to retire.

While framed as making the airlines more profitable, outsourcing flight operations to regional carriers was a thinly veiled ploy to pit pilot groups against each other, which, as strategists hoped, would erode leverage by splitting the work force. The proof is in what followed: Predictably, management and labor negotiators were unable to reach agreement regarding wages and work rules, and ultimately comprised by formalizing exceptions to scope clauses that allowed commuter airlines to fly the smaller jets and to rebrand themselves as regional airlines.

While the initial loopholes restricted regional jet capacity and the ratio of regional to mainline jets, the camel’s nose was already under the tent. It did not take long before those initial restrictions were eased and the distinctions between commuter and major became so muddled that the proverbial flock of camels was firmly inside the tent.

Less stringent scope protections and the resulting proliferation of regional jet utilization has forever changed the aviation industry. For instance, in 1991, 0.2 percent of all jet departures were on regional jets. In just 17 years, that statistic has changed dramatically: In 2008, 50 percent of all flights and 20 percent of all passengers were flown on regional jets.

Relatedly, in 2007, approximately 70 percent of the nation’s airports were served exclusively by regional airlines. In 2008, 50 percent of all departures were completed by regional aircraft at the following airports: CLE, CLT, CVG, IAD, IAH, LGA, MEM, MKE, PHL, RDU, SLC, and STL. Aircraft size and route length have further muddied the distinction between regional and mainline flying. To demonstrate, the following tables compare select mainline and regional aircraft and the routes they fly.

While other differences may be elusive, this much is clear: Diminished scope protections have allowed regional airlines to begin flying many of the same routes flown by mainline carriers. By paying their pilots a fraction of what their mainline colleagues earn, regional airlines position themselves to engage in aggressive bidding strategies to secure longer haul routes. An August 2008 report issued by the Airline Pilots Association stated regional captain pay averages $65,000 to $70,000 compared to an average of $155,000 earned by a mainline captain.

Although the relationship between NJA and NJI is different than that between the regional and mainline carriers, Union leadership’s goal has remained focus on capturing the lion’s share of NetJets flying.

Keen Foresight Offers Tremendous Advantages
By assessing this startling trend early on, Strong Union Leadership sought language prohibiting outsourcing. As one Strong Union leader said, “If it has ‘NetJets’ on the side, it will have Union pilots up front!” The first step toward enduring job security was made in the 2005 Agreement, which contained meticulously crafted scope language and positioned the pilot group to win a single-carrier dispute should arbitration become necessary. More specifically, the NJI exception from Section One of the 2005 Basic Agreement was removed; Letter of Agreement 01-001 maintained the status quo at NJI; and, LOA 01-003 allowed NJA pilots to transition to NJI.

The second step required the integration of NJA and NJI. The parties agreed to engage in negotiations but maintained the right to petition the National Mediation Board for assistance should it become necessary. The parties ultimately negotiated and signed LOA 01-013, which maintained and expanded NJA pilot movement to NJI while creating a framework to guide the integration process. Such a detailed outline was intended to avoid NMB intervention.

The Company sent the Initial Integration Notice to the Union in mid September, commencing the start of the multi-phase process. The third and final step in the process involves integrating the two pilot groups into a single collective bargaining unit after Nov. 21, 2010, or the Final Integration Notice is sent, whichever is earlier.

As the first month of 2009 draws to a close, the integration process continues in accordance with all applicable LOAs; NJASAP is communicating with NJI pilots on a weekly basis; and, the parties are working to eliminate remaining scope exceptions.

By remaining keenly focused on securing scope protections throughout the integration process we can offer the best possible, long term job security for all NetJets pilots. Please feel free to contact the NJASAP Integration Team, integration@njasap.com, with questions.

Company informs Union of intent to proceed with NJI/NJA integration

COLUMBUS (09/16/08) – NetJets Aviation, Inc., (NJA) has officially notified NJASAP of its decision to resolve the single-carrier issue by recognizing NJA and NetJets International (NJI) as a single-carrier system. Executive Board President Dennis Cotton was notified of the Company’s plan to proceed with the integration via correspondence dated Sept. 15 from Vice President of Labor and Employee Relations Michael Maratto. In his letter Maratto writes the Company will recognize each carrier “as a single transportation system for purposes of collective bargaining under the Railway Labor Act with employees in the craft or class of pilot.”

Letter of Agreement 01-013, which was signed Dec. 7, 2007, provides the protocol for resolving the single-carrier issue. The integration is expected to conclude before Nov. 21, 2010, or when NJA serves a Final Integration Notice, informing the Union the two entities have commenced one operation.

“The Company’s decision to work in cooperation with our Association as it integrates its domestic and international operations clearly conveys NJA’s commitment to and respect for a strong labor-management partnership,” Executive Board President Dennis Cotton said. “It is, indeed, a tremendously important first step toward resolving what could have been a very contentious issue.”

Yesterday’s developments will have the added bonus of strengthening NJASAP as additional members are welcomed to its ranks. We strongly encourage each NJASAP member to extend a warm welcome when crossing paths with NJI pilots in the weeks and months to come. We need to put our collective best foot forward and provide our new members with the best possible first impression.

While many months of hard work await NJASAP leaders as they prepare for and engage in integration-related discussions, the integration, like the NJASAP disaffiliation, could prove to be a watershed event in labor-management relations. This could, quite possibly, be the first merger completed as employer and employee group work cooperatively – on the same side of the table – with a focus on securing the best possible outcome for all stakeholders.

The credit for much of today's announcements must be attributed to previous and present Union leaders as well as Company officials, who have endeavored to lay a foundation that allows both parties to work in a professional, goal-oriented manner. To wit, the NJASAP membership's collective future only continues to grow brighter.