Originally Posted by
notEnuf
Force majeure is defined by Merriam-Webster as
an event or effect that cannot be reasonably anticipated or controlled— compare ACT OF GOD
Our contract language is much more broad than this.
“Circumstance over which the Company does not have control,” for the purposes of Section 1, means a circumstance that includes, but is not limited to, a natural disaster; labor dispute; grounding of a substantial number of the Company’s aircraft by a government agency; reduction in flying operations because of a decrease in available fuel supply or other critical materials due to either governmental action or commercial suppliers being unable to provide sufficient fuel or other critical materials for the Company’s operations; revocation of the Company’s operating certificate(s); war emergency; owner’s delay in delivery of aircraft scheduled for delivery; manufacturer’s delay in delivery of new aircraft scheduled for delivery. The term “circumstance over which the Company does not have control” will not include the price of fuel or other supplies, the price of aircraft, the state of the economy, the financial state of the Company, or the relative profitability or unprofitability of the Company’s then-current operations.
This can be argued as applying to anything not specifically prohibited.
Then the next step, since the two sides wouldnt be able to agree this case applies to force majeure, the arbitrator would have both sides bring their notes discussing this language. Both sides would present their interpretation of FM and the notes from the meeting specifically addressing the INTENT of that language.
Believe it or not, law doesnt work off black and white, and it never has. Neither does labor contracts. Both sides had an intent when they negotiated that language. The company is probably right, but the union probably didnt say, "look if a corona virus ravages the globe and pax load crater, you aint trying to use that FM crap right?". But heres the problem, the company got bailed out. They convinced whole employee groups to just- leave, go on unemployment, so delta could pocket the money. So they pocketed all that money and had six months to deal with this insane crap. Now six months later, after ignoring us and deciding the small cost savings weren't enough to do anything, suddenly, they want to impose cost savings that wont balance the budget. Id like to hear an impartial arbitrator ask difficult questions like, "so six months of these guys begging you to negotiate and you shrugged them off?" Now its an emergency?