Originally Posted by
Mushroom
Maybe I'm missing something, but there is absolutely no negative to the company to invoke section 4 of the contract. Why wouldn't they? They've been buying up lines for awhile now for flying that isn't really happening. By invoking section 4 of the contract, they don't have to buy anything up with no downside. It makes perfect financial sense for FDX. I'm surprised the company didn't do it earlier.... They can always say it was to prevent a "furlough".
The following is my opinion and my way of venting some of the angst I have been stewing over the last 24 hours.....thanks for the venue to vent - and please, let me know if you think I'm totally out to lunch.......
Mushroom.....that is, in fact, why they have said they are doing it - quote from their letter to the union "in order to prevent or delay a furlough, we will be reducing......"
The negative you are searching for is this - at least I think this is the crux of the matter - if the company arbitrarily invokes section 4.A.2.b. and the union grieves it and wins, the company could stand to be forced to repay all the BLGs (line buyups) that they arbitrarily took away PLUS a "fine" or judgement ($$$) to the uion for willingly and maliciously violating the contract - then go back to square one and try to come up with another lame-brained solution to the problem they've created.
That's the dice the company is rolling here. That's why they've waited until now to try it - it's a very thin sheet of ice to go skating on. But, they're out there now - skating away.....
The company is trying to bluff the pilot group into believing they have a contractual right to lower MBPGs whenever they see fit - as long as they use the magic phrase "in order to prevent or delay a furlough" - they don't.
There must be evidence of this need - according to the "original intent" of the drafters of this section of the contract (FPA as stated by the Negotiating Committee Chairman)
The union has called their bluff stating that the company hasn't shown evidence of overmanning and/or need to and/or
capability to furlough and still continue operating the airline - (all of the HKG FOs, 50% + of the ANC FOs, most of the 727 SOs and a lot of 727 FOs, etc....) - they would have to cease operations or reshuffle everyone (ala last cancelled abortion of an excess bid) - which would take years and millions of $$$ to realign everyone.
therefore, the company doesn't have the contractual right to lower MBPGs and stop buying up lines - they CANNOT furlough now without shutting down the whole operation - so invoking 4.A.2.b. isn't "preventing or delaying" anything.
We will all have to wait and see what the arbitrator thinks. Meanwhile the company has granted themselves the right to stop buying up lines until the arbitration has been decided.
Can you say "retro pay"?
My 2 cents.