Beaver Eager
Very interesting post indeed. Thank you.
As you say, the so-called "Gentleman's Agreement" would have no value whatsoever in a court of law. However, this leads one to look for the real reason behind its being brought into existence at all.
One is led to suspect that the real reason is in fact quite sinister. Is it possible that CityFlyer colludes with other carriers to, shall we say, 'blackball' those who fail to keep their so-called Gentleman's Agreement?
Further, do you think it is possible that some (informal) association of air carriers (you know, the same ones who get together to swap ideas like bonding and the like) actually keep a blacklist and use it to exclude the naughty boys who tell them what to do with their bonds and their Gentlemen's Agreements?
If you consider these things likely, then you may agree that this might just explain their 'flexibility' with regard to those who leave to 'take up a better offer'. The flexibility may well flow from agreements made between the same group of carriers referred to above. You know, along the lines of: "If you let Joe Bloggs go now we'll reciprocate at some time in the future".
I must say your tale of the mathematically gifted Captain resigning on the day of his final line check creased me up. The question is, is he still flying?
[This message has been edited by tilii (edited 08 April 2001).]