Circumstance over which the Company does not have control,” for the purposes of Section 1, means a circumstance that includes, but is not limited to, a natural disaster; labor dispute; grounding of a substantial number of the Company's aircraft by a government agency; reduction in flying operations because of a decrease in available fuel supply or other critical materials due to either governmental action or commercial suppliers being unable to provide sufficient fuel or other critical materials for the Company's operations; revocation of the Company's operating certificate(s); war emergency; owner's delay in delivery of aircraft scheduled for delivery; manufacturer's delay in delivery of new aircraft scheduled for delivery. The term “circumstance over which the Company does not have control” will not include the price of fuel or other supplies, the price of aircraft, the state of the economy, the financial state of the Company, or the relative profitability or unprofitability of the Company's then-current operations.


Now give me a reason that would allow them to not comply.

 

It began when Chuck Giambusso, acting as Delta MEC Chairman, decided not to fight management on alter ego replacement of mainline pilots. Once Delta management figured out ALPA would accept alter ego replacement of mainline flying the rest was just a matter of time.

 

We might get hit by an asteroid. You can't negotiate disasters or extremely rare one offs. Everything contract has the same language. If your voting no over pay or scope issues that's fine, to find fault with these escape clauses is just plain dumb.

 

Sorry, but this clause is specifically inserted to allow non-compliance with the mainline/regional block hour ratios during a normal economic situation far short of asserting a "force majeure-type" situation. The only other places any similar language is used is WRT AS, foreign carriers and SLI. This language was not used WRT mainline/regional block hour ratios in the current contract.

 

Ok. Well then you just vote NO. Plus, of course the language isnt used WRT to mainline/regional block hour ratio in our current contract because our current contract DOESN'T have a ratio. They can just pull us down and we can't even grieve it. And you still failed to give me an example.

 

The company decides to start parking the 717s in five to ten years and the CPAs don't allow for parking any of the 70-76 seaters.

 

Why were 70 seat regionals allowed in C2000?

 

The ratios don't call for parking airplanes. It's block hours. Nothing stops them from parking mainline or regional planes now, or in the new TA. But the new TA does control block hours, and the current TA does not. The list of acceptable circumstances is in the contract. Delta controls the CPAs. Those are not out of their control. They control DCI block hours right. That is not out of their control. When I was at CoEx, Continental chucked extra block hours and slashed block hours all the time.

 

To leverage outsourcing. It was the beginning of the partnership .... and DCI had a 500 airplane order before C2K.

 

Fine. Mainline block hours drop in relation to regional block hours to an extent violating the mainline/regional ratios and DL claims they cannot remove regional block hours or six seats due to CPAs.

Do you know a neutral who will order DL to fly more mainline hours or force DCI to not enforce their CPAs?