Originally Posted by
gloopy
Agreed, which is why we need strict penalties for non compliance. In the interim, we need to aggressively pursue injunctions to cease any non compliant flying. In any case, worshipping PS as greater than scope because of how weakly we settled the AF grievance, carried to its logical conclusion, would mean that we should trade existing scope for more PS because PS is almighty and scope is weak. That is simply not the case. If you got a penny from PS its only because you had a job because of scope in the firs place to be on the list to get the PS.
Scope > PS. All day, every day.
How about we keep the two issues separate. PS was written into the contract in times of concessions as sort of a safety valve. If the company became wildly profitable (it did) after we took massive pay-cuts (we did) we would be compensated (we are).
I agree that Scope is all important, but it is a stand alone issue.
Scoop