Originally Posted by
Denny Crane
Oh, absolutely we should force them to comply with all the provisions of our contract. I was not advocating to sell scope in the slightest. I guess I wasn't clear. I will try to be more so.
Take the current situation with the TAJV. Assume this (I know it will be hard Carl
): The noncompliance is grieved and won and the company is forced to comply.
If money is not an adequate compensation for the violation............what is? That was the point of my question.
In my previous post, I used the term Atlantic to mean the TAJV. This is the JV that will be way out of compliance by the measuring date of March 2014. If we win the grievance (and there's no way to lose unless DALPA purposely loses it for strategic reasons), then forcing them to comply means just that. They can comply in three ways: 1. Fly more Atlantic stuff with Delta pilots. 2. Force the partners to reduce their Atlantic flying. 3. Cancel the JV. There is no fourth choice of compensatory damages. Comply means comply. If we allow anything else, we set the precedence of rendering ratios and percentages meaningless in any JV or code share.
What am I missing here Denny?
Carl