Originally Posted by
Cgo John
No matter how bad the teamster attorneys are this would be a hard one to lose. You cannot pay someone outside of the contract for doing work done by members of the employee bargaining group.
It will probably boil down to the definition of "employee". That's where the IBT loses most grievances. The definition of "seat", "a pilot", "city", "airport" are just a few examples that have different definitions per the company. Every judge and arbitrator on the planet will simply rubber stamp the company definition. I appreciate the thought, but the idiot teamsters are going to lose this as well. The only winners are the lawyers collecting some serious coin.