Originally Posted by
Carl Spackler
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
You're not missing anything. (If anything, I'm the one missing something!
) I'm assuming we will win any grievance and there will be consequences to the company one of which is to comply with the TAJV percentages. I was just curious what you would like to see as "compensation" for the flying already lost if it wasn't money. I would agree with your number 1, fly more to get us back into compliance and make up for the time we have lost prior to winning a grievance. The only problem with that is we would have to eventually cut it back to remain within the proper percentages. Numbers 2 and 3 are resolutions of the problem going forward after a grievance. I would want some kind of compensation for the shortage of flying that is occurring now (whether it be more flying over and above the TAJV percentage to make up the shortfall or money).
When the end of the window comes I sure hope we hold the company's feet to the fire on the this issue. Everything I've heard from my reps leads me to believe we will. Time will tell. It would take a major screw up to lose a grievance like this one.
Denny