Originally Posted by
Viper25
I understand all of this. It’s just a little hard for me to wrap my head around that SAs and SRH, which derive their information from the PWA, claim information that isn’t in the PWA. I’ll believe everyone that they’re binding. I just don’t know how the discrepancy can exist. I guess I’m not making my confusion clear but it’s not worth dragging this on any longer. So on this topic I’m out.
Changing PWA language is difficult to do and has significant risks. If you were to change a single sentence, an argument can be made that it would void all past practice and interpretations of the previous language. And then any disagreement on a “new” interpretation would be subject to the grievance process which is heavily slanted in management's favor. It’s much easier and lower risk to agree to supplemental language that the parties agree is binding.