Viewing page 8 of 130

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

Affiliated with the A. F. of L.
"Schedule with safety"

AIR LINE PILOTS ASSOCIATION
International
3145 West Sixty-Third Street
Chicago 29

Telephone Hemlock 5015

[[image - logo]] 537

Page 3

For the Judge's third reason, nothing prohibits the Company from using any amount of time before closing out a bid just so long as it is not less than 10 days. What happens? The Judge says that the extension was for 10 days, it was proper as far as the time element is concerned, and since it cancelled out the original bid and is in effect a new bid, there is nothing wrong with it. If this thinking is consistent then the new bid should have been a completely new bulletin, which it wasn't. The decision again points out there was no violation of the seniority rule (Sec. 17) in awarding the assignment to Captain Murray. Again I say there has never been any representation on our part that a seniority question was involved. It is the Company that raised this particular issue. 

I respectfully offer these notes and observations for your consideration. How can we continue this grievance. Is it possible to reverse the Judge's decision. Is it possible to file a group grievance on just one issue , i.e. the Judge's first reason because it allows qualification to mean qualified over a route or an airplane instead of qualified as a pilot, in his respective status (Copilot, Reserve Pilot, First Pilot). Why can't we do both of these things at the same time. 

Respectfully yours,

Michael A. Gitt

cc:
D. L. Behncke
R. Silver
B. Macklin