70 seaters, scope, and obstacles to your raise and a better contract

I would like to share with you a couple of rumors, for what they are worth, and then make a suggestion which could expedite a contract.
RUMORS:
1) When the initial company offer was made that the United faction was more receptive to considering aspects of it than the Continental group.
2) Jay Pierce has no vested interest in seeing a contract signed. He personally sees no upside.
3) The company is receptive to the 90 seaters being flown in house.
4) The 50 seaters are future ash trays as they have never turned a profit.

Let's put these together and look at what is preventing us from getting a contract.  Continental, as you know, did not allow 70 seaters on the property, and as such, they will consider it a losing proposition to accept the change to outsource that flying. We, on the other hand, don't have 70 seaters in house  so not having them in the future would be no loss to us.

I therefore submit that if scope is a big issue, a big stumbling block, and the aspect of scope that the company sees as being costly is losing the cheap outsourced 70 seat flying and having to entertain the extra cost of flying it in house, then the time and money that WE are losing is in large part for the purpose of creating in house 70 seat flying....which we don't care about. Which nobody on the property will be doing in the future. i.e. YOU are taking the loss of not getting a raise sooner so that some undisclosed/as-yet-not-hired pilot can get a better deal. Lucky you. Very magnanimous. Your representatives may even take issue with the 70 seat flying to the extent of calling a strike on that count. i.e, you would be asked to risk sacrificing your job for someone not even on the property!
I therefore urge you all to write to your representatives and suggest that letting the company have the 70 seaters is a bargaining chip we are prepared to entertain. The Continental group will cry foul, as well they should. Fine, we're all one big family now so I say put it to the vote and let's see how it shakes out. This could be a turning point in the mired, no-progress negotiations that we are coming to accept as status quo. We are the larger group and as such have every right to expect a certain weight in our favor on some issues. This is one of them. It's all well and good to say WE ARE UNITED but the fact is there are separate agendas and priorities at work here, and to ignore that is naive.
Management can assist us in achieving this by demonstrating to the Continental pilots that the extra 90 seat flying we will see that replaces the 70 seat flying represents jobs created . Not all 90 seat flying will be coming off Airbus and 737 routes, and that which comes from 70 seat routes represents in house expansion. The Continental guys need to realize this to be on board.
We also have to understand that current management is about operations, expansion, competition. The old United would simply have seen smaller airplanes on the property as replacements and therefore cost cuts, but I believe our current management would use them largely as additions to the fleet in an effort to get bigger, badder, and more dominant in the marketplace.
One thing is for sure: If we don't change our views on some things  we will never see a new contract during our careers. If you don't believe me, consider this: USAirways and America West are now SEVEN years into their life together, with NO NEW CONTRACT. Is that what you want here?