Originally Posted by
scambo1
Leine,
Respectfully, I disagree with you.
Paranoia would maybe be correct if Republic did not receive (scope noncompliance) language in section 1 of c2012 after we were told for 2-3 years that they were in compliance and we just couldn't read.
The proof will be in the pudding. What the union does when we are at the end of the measurement window will be the determiner of whether anyone is justifiably distrustful or pessimistic, or whether they were correct on their assessment of past practice being a predictor of future actions.
I'll agree with that, and don't fault anyone for being cautious wrt out scope enforcement. Paranoia may have been too strong a word, and I didn't mean it as an insult to hockey (even though it came across that way.) I just don't see us "caving" and feel like guys are already resigned to "DALPA is just gonna sell scope" as if its inevitable. None of the reps I've spoken with indicate anything other than an expectation of compliance with section 1. If the company is not in compliance they have said they will pursue a remedy via the grievance process. Not a single one has said they are willing to trade for $.