Originally Posted by
R57 relay
Well partially correct, but that is what was in question. It does have an AMENDABLE date of Dec21, 2009, which we understand right? Then they went and put this odd lit tidbit in it:
The rates of pay specified in Section 3 of the Agreement, as
modified by the Restructuring Agreement, will be revised as
follows:
1. Freeze current rates effective 5/01/04 through 12/3 1/09.
2. Reduce rates as frozen by 18.0%
3. Reduce International pay override, as stated in Section
3(F) and Section 18(C), by 18.0% for transoceanic trips;
eliminate international override for non-transoceanic trips.
4. Pay all flying at day rate.
That caused all the speculation. Why put in what appears to be an ending date? We know RLA contracts don't end and right above this was the amendable date, so why is this here? If you freeze something to a certain date, doesn't it thaw then? I guess not.
Here's my thinking. First, Carl this was negotiated by ALPA, brought before the arbitrator by USAPA. Very few ALPA loyalist would support USAPA if they were fighting for Nuns and orphans. You see the comments by cactiboss? Those are generous compared to our ALPA loyalist. That is the main reason we had one guy testify. Before this started one of them loudly complained he would testify for the company.
This is pretty much what I thought. One thing we know for certain is that it was ALPA people (specifically ALPA attorneys) that crafted the language. Another thing we know for certain is that the language says this:
Freeze current rates effective 5/01/04 through 12/3 1/09. So what's the intent of that? To continue the freeze after 12-31-09? To work for free after 12-31-09? Or end the freeze after 12-31-09. To me, it clearly means the latter. The FREEZE ends after 12-31-09.
But when one side decides to take language to court, you'd better be prepared with your notes. ALPA came with NO notes. Are we to believe they didn't take any? If so, then they are negligent beyond belief. If they did take notes but now ALPA is withholding them in order to stick it to the pilots who decertified them, well that just sounds like more of the behavior ALPA used against TWA pilots.
The main example this should be to everyone is how incredibly weak ALPA's legal team is. If you didn't want rates to return to the unfrozen level after 12-31-09, then why put any date in at all? Clearly, ALPA lawyers meant for the rates to unfreeze after 12-31-09, but their legal incompetence allowed them to craft this type of language. For everyone that thinks your ALPA dues purchase you the finest legal minds that money can buy...think again.
Carl