View Single Post
Old 04-03-2015 | 06:45 PM
  #3479  
Bananie
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
Great question. Neither side in this Section 6 could place a dollar cost on future profit sharing without just wild guessing. Neither side would want to set the precedent in front of the NMB of proffering (or accepting) a complete wild a$$ guess on any item. Since the profit sharing calculation methodology is part of our current contract, management would have to make the demand that the formulation change. At that point, we could simply say no. If that ended up being the final straw in the Section 6 process, the NMB would step in and ask for the costing data of the company's demand. That costing data could not be provided for future contract years, thus the company could make no claim that our refusal to accept would unduly harm them financially...especially since by definition, profit sharing only applies during corporate success. If the company continued to press for an item that can't be future costed, they would run the strong risk of being found to be bargaining in bad faith by the NMB. Nobody wants that name tag.

This is why it's an untenable position for management. Their only hope is to get us to voluntarily give it up. This is why we're seeing the multi-faceted drive to denigrate profit sharing in the eyes of pilots.

Carl
I guess. It just seems like the company could make the opposite argument that if profit sharing had no value our refusal to give it up would not harm the pilots unduly. I think we should come up with some other argument
Reply