Originally Posted by
acl65pilot
It is a very easy way to get around the case law that you present. With CH11 the company can play innocent sheep with the judge and behind closed doors with the union tell them that unless we get X scope concession we will ask the judge to throw the contract out. Everything you would accuse the company of would be hearsay, as you would have no "proof" and as a result the leverage is not in the Associations favor. Ugly but very plausible when you have the law on your side.
Understand that in the scenario you present, there is still an agreement reached between consenting parties.
This agreement is more fairy tale than reality. Look at the objective history and you will find D-ALPA put the "for sale" sign on junior jobs long before bankruptcy. It started when they went out of their way to begin defining flying that Delta pilots DON'T DO in their scope exceptions.
As you point out, scope has been monetized and used to transact deals with management.
IF we took the moral and legal high ground of never selling out another member, EVER, the value of our jobs would increase (supply / demand curve). Mesabah is quite correct on the law and his contribution to the debate should not be minimized.
Scope sales = political decisions