If it requires interpretation, you will lose. BJ will simply call it positive contact, you will get suspended for a month (or whatever), then you will "grieve" it through some B.S. "arbitration" process (remember 3A), years later you may recover a week's pay all during which BJ will continue to "interpret" the language and accomplishing their goals of exploitation.



Only the legal language matters. If it's not in the contract, it doesn't exist. I agree with you. It doesn't matter what notes of intent ALPA has. Whenever you go to arbitration (even with some notes), it's NO GUARANTEE of victory. Besides, even victory doesn't mean victory (3A). [Incidentally, we should not be agreeing to ANY contract that has binding arbitration - it takes away your right to a fair trial - it replaces it with a kangaroo court always beneficial to the corporation]


Binding arbitration allows a corporation to *get away with an infraction* then use a bureaucratic kangaroo court process to reduce the harm of the infraction on the corporation to a "cost of doing business". Remember when 3A stole your money and what happened? -- BJ got away with it despite being ruled in violation of the PEA.



The only solution is to VOTE NO to TA 1 and make darn sure TA 2 has no legal loopholes (and better pay). Don't count on ALPA MEC/NC to tell you these things. They are doing roadshows to sell you a lemon.



This communique is for entertainment purposes only. It does not implicitly or explicitly acknowledge employment with any air carrier nor is any relationship implied. This communique does not represent the opinions or policies of ALPA or JB ALPA and does not represent the collective pilot group, ALPA, nor does it imply collective bargaining, advocacy, or workforce actions intended to disrupt operations.