Originally Posted by
slowplay
There are no penalties outlined in the TA against the company. Putting penalties in that agreement presupposes that they could violate the contract and it would be "ok", that there were penalties agreed to for violating it. It's akin to asking "what penalties are in the agreement if the company doesn't pay us." Also, if management isn't abiding by the agreement in the ratios, why would they abide by the agreed upon penalties?
Disputes like you describe are resolved in 2 places, the grievance process and the court system.
You have to be kidding me?! We shouldn't put penalties in an agreement because that presupposes they (the company) could violate the contract and it would be OK".
Are you being serious? So when we do make it to the judge and the contract had spelled out clearly in the contract the dollar amount penalty the company had to pay, this would be of no use to us? Have you ever done any sort of business agreement outside of ALPA in your entire life?
Now that I am beginning to understand the way DALPA thinks, it has dawned on me how we get such weak and unenforceable contract language that the company easily exploits.