Originally Posted by
iarapilot
Exactly why the company put the "scope" language in the LOA. It is to protect their rears ends, not to enhance our supposed scope protections. Fairly obvious, in my opinion. Some of the crew force needs to be a little more skeptical about all aspects of this LOA. Think.....worst case scenario.
I know where we both stand on the LOA...against it...but let's make sure to be very careful on how we use terminology and talk about the LOA.
There is No "scope" language in the LOA --- zero, zip, nada!
Of course, there is verbiage that in the work agreement stating the pilots are only governed under US law.
I really wonder what would happen if someone who is a dual citizen (US & France) bids CDG and then has an issue he takes to a French court.
My guess, the French Judge would throw out any FEDEX lawyer that tried to tell him that French law doesn't apply to a French citizen living in France, regardless of what agreement his company forced him to sign.
Think about it from the US perspective --- wouldn't we expect our courts to do the same thing for a US citizen, living and working in the US, who happened to be employed by a foreign company.
The work agreement is there to strong arm/intimidate any pilots who would even contemplate making a grievance under foreign laws.
It only holds up if the foreign court allows it to.