Originally Posted by
Purple Drank
New Virgin Atlantic TA.
If the Company is not in compliance with the minimum international operation requirement (under Section 1 R. 1.) or the minimum ASK requirement (under Section 1 R. 2.) in any measurement period, the Company will cure any such breach by complying with the minimum international operation or ASK requirement, as applicable, in the subsequent measurement period.
Does that mean "if the company is not in compliance this year, it must be in compliance next year?"
what is the motivation to remain in compliance?
as we've seen from the AF/KLM language, the company has no problem blowing off its obligations.
I'm sure we'll get 'em next time.
If that's really the language, it has to be a 100% NO vote from our reps. Let's assume the language requires a 50/50 split. These paragraphs would allow for 10% Delta 90% Virgin on year one, then the company would be perfectly legal if they made it 50/50 the next year. That would be considered a "cure" for that 10/90 year.
Our reps need to send a message to this ridiculously weak negotiating committee that we won't tolerate this anymore. There must be clearly defined and substantial penalties immediately applied for non-compliance. How could our negotiators not know something this basic?
Really hope the ATL line pilots will put the squeeze on those four reps of theirs to vote NO. Anything else will be a terrible signal of weakness to send as we approach 2015 openers.
Carl