Originally Posted by
buzzpat
Scope shouldn't protect people who routinely fail to perform or, more egregious in my book, intentionally don't do their job in attempts to prove a point to the company. I'm all for scope, I'm not for consistent refusal to perform required tasks. I really haven't had many problems at MSP or MEM. My ***** is with what is an obvious work slowdown in DTW. Can you imagine what would happen to pilots or FAs if we routinely chose not to perform our duties? Scope or no scope, we'd be on the street.
Buzz, you're not getting me.
2 issues:
1) Not doing one's work: unacceptable.
2) Protecting one's work duties from having said duties performed by someone else: scope
The fact that their scope clause happens to also protect them when not doing their job is an unfortunate side effect and I find that sad.
Having contract language defining scope so well it can be used even in situation where people aren't doing their job makes me want to hire their contract writers to work for us...Whoever wrote that clause is good.
Cheers
George