Why not? Both parties signed it therefore there is the assumption you did your due diligence to see thoroughly review it and thus it was not coercively signed. Court is not about "fair" or "right". Both parties signed it, thus end of story.

Besides, it would never see court. As things stand, the worthless PEA people seem to stand behind might as well be toilet paper because it goes to arbitration. In the kangaroo court environment of arbitration, the company will win. Remember 3A.

And even before that, JB will simply ask you to come in, admit that you didn't clean by re-iterating the policy, concluding by having you sign an admission of "guilt". This will go in your secret file that any company can keep since there is no legal restriction or endorsement of personnel files. The next time something happens, you get more paperwork. Eventually when they have enough "insubordination" (see the BJ "BlueBook"), you will be terminated.

All is to say that BJ does everything from a legal stance. They talk of culture and other MBA 101 B.S. but they have all their legal paperwork ready to go for every scenario. Meanwhile, we have all allowed it.

Oh.... Not good. 100% agree needs to be fully addressed in the CBA.

Yup.

No compromise. (hear that ALPA?)

We get what we demand or we strike.

You can search for it on your Ipad. It even makes it sound like they want you to clean while deadheading without specifically saying deadheading. It says traveling for leisure or ‘business’. Open to whatever interpretation as to what they mean by business travel. Does that mean I have to clean while deadheading after I just took a 6 hour long checkride?

Yup and that's part of the problem. There's no exceptions whatsoever written anywhere.

Of course the BIGGER problem is that it created precedent for them to conscript us to perform whatever task they wish us to perform by attaching it to some benefit or "privilege". If I can't commute, I can't get to work. I mentioned to Southerner where he would draw the line... if tomorrow they create online training (with the same 'sign here' clause at the end) that says all pass-riding, non-revving, business, or pleasure travelers would need to clean the toilet, what would stop them? I'm most unhappy that ALPA grieved that we didn't get paid for taking the training but did nothing to address the contractual obligation contained in the training.

Why not? Because it violates state and federal labor and tax laws. Just because you and I sign a contract does not mean it is LEGAL. Extreme case, but if I signed a contract to haul heroin for B6 that would not stand up because it is illegal. Having people provide labor for you without accounting for that labor, ensuring it meets minimum wage standards, paying social security, medicare and federal withholdings for it nullifies the contract.

I'm glad you said that. Would you mind asking this scenario question to the MEC? I get crickets or a diversionary answer (e.g. we grieved it --- they grieved not being paid for training -- the wrong thing).

Also, what do you think about FA's not being paid until the door closes? Or for that matter, isn't our pay only based in OOOI times? So our walkarounds and other pre-flight, post-flight activities are also uncompensated? I find it odd that we get paid for online training but not other activities. It's like they are picking and choosing or simply they've never been challenged by lawsuit. The common answer is "it's always been that way" but that's not an answer.

Your drug analogy is kinda funny so let me give you a somewhat lighthearted reply... :p:p evidently you can haul drugs if the CIA, DEA, FBI contracts you to... I know the military has been doing it for a long time although they are under their own laws.

§ 91.19 Carriage of narcotic drugs, marihuana, and depressant or stimulant drugs or substances.
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, no person may operate a civil aircraft within the United States with knowledge that narcotic drugs, marihuana, and depressant or stimulant drugs or substances as defined in Federal or State statutes are carried in the aircraft.
(b) Paragraph (a) of this section does not apply to any carriage of narcotic drugs, marihuana, and depressant or stimulant drugs or substances authorized by or under any Federal or State statute or by any Federal or State agency.



http://18675-presscdn.pagely.netdna-...ericanmade.jpg

I have yet to hear of anyone being called in for not cleaning. Anyone here been harrassed by anyone other than an FA with the sarcastic “Thanks for the help!” ?

What matters is what is written, not anecdotal reports. Details matter. You can't pick and choose.

and we ALL have a vote! APC does not vote on our behalf?......