OK, I'll play.... So answer this. If the "Nic" is in fact a "Binding" agreement, Why will the courts NOT mandate its use??
I'll give you a hint...Courts do not like to mingle in union matters. The unions are given "A broad range of reasonableness" when dealing with issues such as this. Therefore USAPA is free to vacate the Nic. If and when a JOINT doh cba is ratified, the west will be free to sue. However, the burden of proof that a legitimate DFR exists, will lie on the plaintiff. If USAPA gives the west protections in the form of C&Rs, how could they claim a DFR?
In essence, Doug has been given immunity in the form of GUIDANCE by the courts. As long as the Co. is free of "Collusion", it can agree to a CBA that does not include the "Nic"..