MT
Well-Known Member
Now you may say they are 121 and not 135, but the union could probably argue that 121 is included and EV and C5 flight attendants
now make UA money.
I will argue that. I see your point and acknowledge that such an interpretation could be made. However contracts should be interpreted as written and both sides could gain or lose based on the wording.
Here, it states that they may not have a controlling ownership stake in a Commuter Airline (Primary Part 135). If you want to dive into the minute on the wording, EV and C5 are Part 121 “Regional Airlines” the contract explicitly states Commuter Airline (Primary Part 135) which the FAA has a published list found below, and specifically outlines what marketing names have airlines associated with them https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2020-02/Commuter List 2020_0.pdf
C5 does appear in this list in an odd way, but they’re still 121.
No doubt that if it was attempted a grievance would be filed and probably go to arbitration, but my uneducated opinion is that they would rule for the company based strictly on what the contract says, not what it “meant.” However, I do agree that it’s way too expensive of a risk for the company to have the arbitrator rule against.