Originally Posted by
theUpsideDown
Im not a contract expert.
I assume its a violation and so does sailing fun. I dont even care the issue being brought up. All im saying is you cant let a violation go because "later" the court might be more sympathetic. Arbitrators call balls and strikes (best they can) and dont take current economic climate into a violation.
Assuming it’s a violation is where I think you go wrong. It will not be a violation until a neutral says it’s one and I believe that’s a distinct possibility. I believe Sailingfun point is that at this time it’s not a violation but it may become one at a future point in time.
The grievance committee (or whatever we call it here at delta) is trying to identify violations and harm, then they consult with the alpa attorneys. Theres an order to the grievance process, so you might put a sure winner thats easy to explain (and you have precedent) back further when you can double up (or more) on a day.
Anyway, i was simply telling sailing you can't just pick and choose what to enforce or else youre making a past practice of not enforcing the thing you negotiated for. Now that doesn't mean the arbitrator will agree with you automatically.
Can’t argue With the rest.
Denny