Originally Posted by
dera
Question from watching this from the outside. What exactly is the arbitrator going to rule on? Under RLA he does not have authority to write new language on an grievance, he can only interpret the existing CBA. If there is no language allowing the NEA, then an arbitrator can not give that to the company. The company can not just go to an arbitrator and say "hey we really need this but our contract does not allow it" and expect the arbitrator to award that.
This is correct. There’s no logical way an arbitrator could decide the company isn’t violating our contract. Jetblue even confessed to it prior to the first vote against LOA 13. It’s in writing. “We need you to pass this deal, because we need relief from certain sections of your contract.”
It doesn’t matter if the company saves a dollar or a billion dollars. The only issue being decided is: does this action violate our contract? If so, the arbitrator must force the company to discontinue the violation.