Originally Posted by
Rogue24
Bar;
Just because the event does not violate the PWA nor does it violate the actual language of the C&BL, not does it violate AM Section 40, (scope was not changed and the DAL PWA still rules, per the Bridge Agreement) it does not preclude the MEC from coming to a consensus that they do not enjoy the fact that they were not informed nor part of the process. Maybe the understanding of the C&BL is not how the actual language reads.
Resolutions start the process of debating the issue at the local and then MEC level (If passed at the LEC level). I have read on here that you want the language changed to take out the ambiguity. When is your LEC meeting? Is your meeting before the MEC meeting where a passed local resolution will have the ability to be debated at the next Regular MEC meeting? (Feb 12-15) If so, write a resolution and get some debate of the issue at you LEC meeting.
If that does not seem like enough, use you ability to speak to the MEC during the MEC Meeting. Every pilot in good standing has the right.
Rogue24,
How did we reach a consensus without a meeting ?
Do we have unconfirmed contract admin making unilateral determinations on CBL matters ?
This "determination" before the MEC meeting in February preempts action the staff does not want.
The way I see it, the language exists in the Admin Manual. That language was ignored. Again using the speeder analogy:
WHEREAS the current law states the speed limit in the school zone is 25 MPH.
WHEREAS some drivers insist on doing 80
LET IT BE RESOVED the law will read: "The speed limit in the school zone is
REALLY 25 MPH.
Same folks who refuse to enforce current language would be no more compelled to enforce any future language.