Originally Posted by
Dash8widget
True, but the contract doesn't say that you have to acknowledge AT three hours prior to report - just that you have UNTIL three hours prior.
Yep. You don't have to wait until 3 hours prior (I never have), but you can if so inclined/can't do otherwise per our current contract.
They don't have to unilaterally change the contract to REQUIRE a 2 hour acknowledgment window - the "able to report" clause along with FAR 117 requirements, takes care of it for them.
This is where we'll have to agree to disagree. There are two clauses in our contract which will soon be contradictory. Why do we have to give ours up? They
could meet "our" clause of 3 hour to show acknowledgment
and 117 by changing the way they do business or agreeing to changing "their" portion of the 12 hour able to report clause. They don't want to in order to keep costs down.
So again I ask, are we going to fight for our 3 hour acknowledgment or something that is mutually agreeable, or are we going to roll over and give it up. I don't agree right now that our 3 hour prior acknowledgement just vanishes due to 117. Perhaps their 12 hour able to report could vanish instead? It can be made to work at greater expense. Again reference the case law.
Your example of:
Again, they are leaning on the "able to report" requirement (also contractual). Being "able to report" includes, among other things, that you are legal to report. By not acknowledging an assignment outside the 10 hour window, YOU are making yourself illegal for the rotation - and therefore, "unable to report." That puts you in violation of the contract. They don't have to unilaterally change the contract to REQUIRE a 2 hour acknowledgment window - the "able to report" clause along with FAR 117 requirements, takes care of it for them.
could also be looked at as working
against them as well. Substitute the statement in your example with: "Pt 117 takes care of/extends the able-to-report within 12 hours for us because we have the don't-have-to-acknowledge-until-3 hours-prior clause." You seem to be looking at it from a one-way street perspective. It seems to me that it can work both ways. And I hope that we are fighting for that other way, or at minimum, a melding satisfactory to us.
Then again I could be talking out of where the sun don't shine, but hopefully not.