i wrote this on the other thread... after you read this tell me is there any other way the arbitrator could have ruled?? (once again we will have to see what the mec says about this, no facts yet, just rumors)




B. SCOPE

1. Except as provided in subsections B.2. and B.3., below, all present and future flying of any form performed by or for the Company will be performed by pilots on the Pilots’ System Seniority List in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Agreement. The phrase “present and future flying of any form performed by or for the Company” includes without limitation all such flying (1) on the Company’s aircraft (whether leased or owned), or (2) under the Company’s operational control, including wet leases and contracting for other carriers or entities (government, military or commercial), but does not include dry leases to other carrier or entities.

2. Notwithstanding subsection B.1., above, the Company may assign, wet
lease or contract out present or future flying for a period of nine (9)
months during the term of this Agreement if (1) such conduct is necessary
to accomplish the needs of service of the Company, and (2) the Company
does not have sufficient aircraft and pilots to perform such flying. The
Company will notify the MEC Chairman prior to executing the
assignment, subcontracting or wet lease agreement. No pilot will be
furloughed during any assignment, subcontracting or wet leasing.

3. Notwithstanding subsection B.1., above, the Company may (1) use nonseniority list pilots in connection with aircraft transactions and (2) use
manufacturer’s pilots to currently qualify the initial cadre of instructors
and check airmen on a new aircraft type. Initial cadre means a sufficient
number of instructors and check airmen to train and qualify pilots for the
arriving fleet.


4. The Company will not create or control another airline for the purpose of transferring the assets of the Company to such airline and avoiding its obligations to the pilots of the Company under this Agreement.