Was this intended to add something to the thread? If so, it failed.
I'm not turning this into a labor/mgmt relations thread -- I only attempted to highlight the fact that these 'cross fleet' operations are more apt to disruption than the flights they are replacing.
For example, at IAD if the ZRH flight has a mechanical issue, there are multiple 767s that can swap in and keep the flight on time. A common solution is to take the late departing 767s (ACC or FRA) and move them into an earlier departure while working on the broken plane. It is often fixed by scheduled ACC/FRA departure times. Also, there is normally at least one 767 that spends the night at IAD that can swap into the late departure if the other isn't repaired. This 'defense in depth' doesn't exist in a one plane/one crew/limited mx operation such as EWR-ZRH, EWR-BRU, or IAD-CDG, IAH-LIM, etc... The only reason the contract negotiations came into the discussion is that the constant delay and lack of good faith negotiations on the part of the company have created an environment that makes it less likely for the employees to do 'extra' for the company. And yes, it is doing extra for the COMPANY. They are only cross fleeting because they are increasing revenue...are they sharing it with you or me?
The fact that the CO mechanics can't work on our planes or vice versa is problematic. I honestly don't know why this is the case since we use contract maintenance at outstations??? At any rate, it appears to be the case in EWR and IAH. Maintenance technicians should do maintenance engines runs -- not me. If they don't have anyone qualified, that's not your or my fault, they are trying to save a dime at both of our expense. They could easily add that capability if they chose.
You also have the issue of crews. New York based UA 767 pilots are not international qualified, so they can't act as reserves. If the company needs a pilot, they are required to use one from another domicile (typically DCA). Our scheduling rules require the pilot to layover in NY/NJ the night prior to flying, so there is not ability to contractually fill a seat on short notice. This IS an issue. I've flown this trip 5 times and it almost caused a problem twice. In one case, the other First Officers wife (in SC) was having a CT scan done as we were driving to the airport. This was a short notice test and had the potential to uncover a very bad medical condition. Needless to say, he wasn't going to leave for ZRH until he heard the that test was negative! The odds were that he wouldn't be going, but the test was indeed negative and we left on time. On my last trip, the other First Officer spent the layover in ZRH and the flight from ZRH to EWR sniffling and coughing. He notified them that he was going on sick list on the flight to EWR and they were able to get a reserve up from DCA that afternoon for a legal layover. Also, on a recent flight we returned to the gate in EWR because a FA was having chest pains. Fortunately we were over the minimum number of FAs and were able to depart. Obviously, these crew issues are a non player at IAD (for UA crews) and EWR (for CO crews). Integrated seniority lists will solve these problems. The integrated seniority lists will only come after joint contracts.
Clear as mud I'm sure.