Originally Posted by
SideStickMonkey
Lets not muddy the waters quite yet. This is simple, the company reroutes you (almost always out of company convenience), it should pay 200%. Full stop. We can worry about the other niche scenarios later but right now the company is not in compliance and is once again stealing money from the pilots.
To be clear, I completely agree with you.
The point I was making was that the other poster was trying to make the issue a “bookkeeping error” when the dispute is about contract language interpretation. The company believes they are in compliance with the settlement and no additional pay is due. ALPA (and everyone with a brain) realizes that optional automation that doesn’t work all the time is not in compliance. The dispute is over the language, not if 200% is equal to 50%/100%.