Originally Posted by
Mesabah
You're right. Thanks for jogging my memory. I had to go digging through some of my old documents. The NWA flight attendant injunction came first, in August of that year, setting the precedent. Prior to that, the Mesaba judge had balked at issuing the injunction against a strike in July. After the NWA ruling, the precedent was set, and Mesaba employees were screwed.
Management had asked to treat the MAIR letter as part of the contract. The judge refused and left that between the union and MAIR. When that failed, management then asked to make the necessary section 1 modifications to permit MAIR to fly the larger aircraft. Once again the Judge refused. I have that ruling on pdf. as well.
Again, that has nothing to do with scope being protected from 1113(c). That's just an issue of the MAIR letter not being subject to the bankruptcy courts, because MAIR wasn't in bankruptcy.
Edit: Also in the filing is Mesaba's attempt to make modifications to the AMFA section 1 scope clause, that failed as well.(judge kept scope intact)
Now that I would be interested in seeing. Have a link?