I take the point, so why not 111 seats, or a figure which allows the BACX pilots the feeling they have actually achieved SOMETHING by being part of BA,
(ie an increased size of 146/RJ Fleet until the intro of the Emb 170)
without hazarding any mainline jobs. Whilst completely understanding and agreeing your bottom line over mainline Ts and Cs, I can't quite see that the whole future of mainline pilots depends on keeping BACX pilots off any current or future BA aoc aircraft types. I mean, practically, though BACC could easily enforce the various histrionic threats made on here about any CURRENT mainline aoc types, just suppose that BA ended the RJ leases, and moved the BA pilots appropriately to other bases, whilst at the same time, BACX entered into new, probably cheaper leases on similar aircraft? This would be outwith any BALPA action, provided the pilot moves were structured cleverly enough not to be deemed constructive dismissal. It may be a little farfetched too; however, consider the Emb 170 and its competitors. 70 to 120 seats, BRAL and Brymon were always going to be getting a lot of these, and after the current market turns, you can depend on it happening. What do you suggest then? Change your scope clause? Suggest none but mainline pilots can fly a jet anywhere there are mainline pilots. I don't think so.
Again, compromise is surely the thing rather than wanting everything one's own way? If all parties feel they have gained most of what they want, then it is a good agreement. If some parties feel it is not a negotiation, but rather just a completely negative and dictatorial order or command, then there will be no harmony - which is to none of our advantages.
Ball bouncing into your court sir!