Originally Posted by
Denny Crane
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
Now I'm with you. I knew I was missing your main point.
Unfortunately, the way I read our JV language, I don't think we have a strong case for receiving any compensatory damages for flying lost
prior to the measurement date of March 2014. The arbitrator would likely only give us a fix going forward.
This totally depends on how ALPA allows DALPA to fight this grievance. Any and all funds/legal assets would come from ALPA national. One choice of ALPA's would be to negotiate it away directly with management without any DALPA input. Another would be for DALPA to purposely put forth an extremely weak case and try to lose in exchange for a strategic promise from management. Yet another possibility is for DALPA to claim our language is too weak to even grieve (like the RAH scope abuse).
In order to win this, we would need a strong response from ALPA national showing anger at the number of jobs lost by Delta pilots and commit the full legal resources of national to defend the language and accept nothing other than full compliance immediately. It will also require DALPA forcing management to do something they absolutely don't want to do. What do you think our chances are of getting these responses from ALPA/DALPA?
Carl