Your answer fails. It's one thing to not have specific language spelling out damages for breaking the contract where it rarely, if ever, is broken. It's entirely another thing to have a huge middle finger pointed in our face for 4 years in this section, then the first chance we have to address the shortcomings, not shore them up. Instead we re-write that section, converting noncompliance into compliance?!

We know Delta is willing to ignore the language in the JV portion of our contract. I don't think even a spinster like yourself will dispute that. Let me ask the question again, why would we be foolish enough to create a new agreement that does not include stiff penalties for ignoring this particular section of our contract? if Delta is not willing to agree to such, it's as good as admitting they are ready and willing to violate it again. If they make a hundred million dollars breaking the contract and pay out thirty million in return, of course they will keep doing it. You ALPA guys keep telling us we have the best legal minds in the business and this is the best you can come up with? Something doesn't add up here.