Originally Posted by
tsquare
Maybe the question comes down to a matter of cost. It seems that alfa's quotation of the contract was pretty clear, and that the due process you seek might be a waste of time, effort and money. So maybe if you feel so strongly about this grievance.. -which in my cursory and albeit limited examination- has little merit.. the parties that stand to benefit should fund the litigation. Personally I am not into frivolity.. especially if it costs a lot... and lawyers are expensive.
You might want to ask to take look at the MEC budget before you throw the cost issue around. Another Red Herring. Fact is there was a process and agreement in place to resolve outstanding merger related issues that were going to inevitably come up. I don't know if it will end at an arbitrator or not, but as they have already scheduled a Special MEC meeting to address the issue I guess they think it worth the cost of resolving.
One side does not just get to arbitrarily say the other pre-merger groups issues no longer have merit. There will be others as time moves on, particularly if there is a cancellation of the 787 order or penalty payments take the form of another protected aircraft. It's budgeted for.
The tendency to dismiss as without merit or minimize issues where one group does not have a vested interest is problematic and not just limited to this grievance issue.