Originally Posted by
PT6flyer
Not that I really care but don't you see it as a hard win? The language is pretty clear that Delta can substitute any other carrier for a flow down to place. Anyways if ALPA wins the case, the planes have to fly. Delta just lost Billions of dollars. It's clear that grounding the airplanes is not the best business decision for the company nor the pilots. It's a toss up, but really no harm was done to the Delta pilots, the deal of LOA just found a new home. Like carry on already.
Where do you see the clear language that DAL can substitute another carrier once the flow down goes away? My understanding is:
-the 35 RJs are mentioned in one place, DAL PWA 1.B.47.f exemption two.
-that section says “In the event the hiring or flow provisions of NWA LOA 2006-10 or LOA #9 cease to be available, either at the feeder carrier affiliate referenced in such LOAs or at another carrier, the number of permitted 76-seat aircraft in Section 1 B. 47. e. will be reduced by 35.” That’s a procedure to reduce the 76-seat RJ limit.
-since the provisions of LOA 9 ceased to be available, the number of 76-seaters was reduced. It happened and is complete from a contractual standpoint.
-I am aware of no provision to increase the number of 76-seaters, by 35 or any other quantity, now that there is a flow down.
What did I miss? Where is the clear language allowing the reestablishment of a flow down to increase the limit on RJs?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk