Originally Posted by
Tuck
The language will always override even when there is a precedent. One could always say a specific auditor or other made a mistake. .......Look I don't like it but it's pretty hard to say, yeah regardless of the clear rules, I broke them a lot, was allowed to break them so therefore I should still be allowed to break them even though we agreed to the rules as written.
Here's some written language straight from the contract. It's about interpretation, application and previous acceptance of the language available. This isn't about some rogue auditor or being allowed to "break the rules".
Travel claimed as a deviation expense must begin or end within 3 days of the scheduled assignment to/from which the pilot is deviating (e g , scheduled deadhead, trip or R-day) and must proceed to the intended destination of the deviation with no greater than a 24 hour delay enroute, domestically, and a 48 hour delay en route internationally
Where do we delay for 24 hours without a hotel? Just because you can find other contract language that puts the past practice in question, there is language to support it. That, plus established precedent is enough, IMO.