It is an assumption that with JETCRW, acknowledging it is a prerequisite to 2-way communication. Your conventional wisdom does not apply when technology is involved. This is precisely the problem being debated in courts with technology companies every day. People are bringing in their layman understanding but coming to incorrect conclusions because they do not have the benefit of knowing the technology platform.

If you want a lesson on assumption vs. fact, look no further than the FAA paper that ALPA distributed regarding cleaning vs. the chief pilot response. The CP response is a mindjob leading you to fill in the blanks with assumption in order to extract work from you (for free). They know they are in a legal bind so they could only say "look over there, squirrel!". [incidentally, make sure you read the WHOLE thing...there's 20 pages, not just the first 2 or 3]

As the language stands in the TA, they could interpret positive communication in JETCRW however they want. It's one of dozens of dangerous deficiencies in the TA.

If it's not explicitly written, it doesn't exist. That's just how legal stuff works because otherwise we would live in a world of assumption, innuendo, and expectation. Law was set up to provide a fair, organized way of thinking social contracts.

The Railway Labor Act Simplified

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.