Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Union wins SLI appeal

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

Hydroplane

Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2007
Posts
5
http://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/17a0152p-06.pdf

For the reasons set forth above, we AFFIRM the district court’s determination that theCBA pilot-integration provision is not in conflict with McCaskill-Bond; AFFIRM itsdetermination that it had jurisdiction to order the Carriers to act in conformity with the CBA,which requires that they either accept the ISL or submit to expedited grievance arbitration;VACATE the preliminary injunction to the extent it permits the Carriers to do the former andremoves the option to do the latter; and REMAND this matter to the district court for furtherproceedings consistent with this opinion.
 
Last edited:
That's good. How about a update on the last arbitration. The info I'm getting is that it didn't go well.
 
So after reading that the company can choose to abide by it or disagree at which point it goes to arbitration. Given the fact that both courts actually upheld the contract it seems improbable that an arbitrator would find any different. However it would take up more time and would be consistent with the companies wasteful spending!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
"And removes the option to do the latter" means they can't go to arbitration. They must accept the list. There is no more time wasting on this issue for them.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top