Originally Posted by
WesternSkies
This is stating that the company has not acted unilaterally against a pilot vote and if they do their 100% funding of SAPA would be be inviolation of the RLA.
We need a sticky.
I agree fully with the sentiment, but it’s pretty difficult to legally consider actions unilateral when SAPA willingly signs stuff the pilots don’t want. (And then refuses a conversation after the fact)
Ex. Proffering