Originally Posted by
Viper25
I understand your points. But the only reason it improved your QOL (or the GS pilot’s QOL) is because it was a compensation for violating the contract.
Are we supposed to get benefits from the contract based on what it actually provides, or based on what we can get for violations, or both?
I can see the argument for both, but if I had to pick one, I’d easily say the former. The point of the contract is to derive value from its contents. I’d be willing to bet that even if the company paid all the compensatory 23M7s correctly, we would still have a large group up in arms about how the company is violating 23N/O.
Its honestly a more philosophical question about the nature of a labor contract, and as I said earlier, these weren’t all my ideas.
The philosophical question only applies if both parties are honorable in the execution. We have seen how willing the company is to violate the PWA. Punitive payouts for the violations is the only pragmatic approach. I agree that in a perfect world the compensation should come from the PWA being followed, unfortunately that requires mutual respect and genuine good faith. As for CNO there is a huge cost saving benefit for the company and I doubt we know a true number that would reflect an appropriate quid. Auto accept is necessary until there is a solution for the phone blowing up every 5 minutes for no reason.