Originally Posted by
gloopy
But those airlines only existed in the first place because they complied with the seat limits. In fact to be accurate, if they had that one extra seat, it would have been grieved and shut down and wouldn't have had that seat.
There are also many other potential merger examples where having more that that number of seats would still end up looking way, way more like staple or even pref interviews than a walk on full relative +/- 3% scenario.
There are three options: 1. They can be shut down, 2. Management has to remove that 1 seat, 3. A full or partial SLI between the two carriers. The NMB will always choose option 3. You can now see why it is in ALPA's best financial interest to not grieve that situation at all, and allow the scope violation to continue. However, it is in management's best interest to not do this, as the toxic atmosphere it would create would eat into profits.