Originally Posted by Funk

Great question, and completely unknowable until this course of action, or another similarly minded, is pursued as part of negotiations. Whether this would be the ideal solution or not, I don't know. I am open to other frameworks for fixing things. This was my quick spitball. Further, just because a person or company is acting badly doesn't mean we can't still pursue fixes and remedies. Bucking isn't wrong when he alludes to failures on providing contextual information to passengers, stockholders, and our fellow employees on the ways in which the company has, or intends to violate the PWA.

I would posit two things though: 1) Failure to secure a better form of contractual enforcement will continue to leave us at the whim of a company that acts just like a camel with its nose under the tent with respect to scope at all levels. The PWA lacks an enforcement mechanism that effectively dissuades the company from malignant or negligent actions, nor does it have a have a reliable and expeditious way to measure or remedy the injury against the pilots (and I could say FA's as well, but our PWA doesn't cover them), and 2) Our current balance of production provisions are already badly distorted, and as JB in his sometimes obnoxious manner is wont to point out, it hurts the entire seniority list. It should only be a 50-50 split between equal companies doing codeshare. When one of those companies (ours) owns nearly 50% of the other company, we should get 50% of the production on that side of the ledger as well.