However, of the Union fails to partake in the Unions 'agreement' to negotiate change then surely the 'agreements' which form part of the contract may be altered by the company?
I am not sure the whole thing is as clear cut as you would like to make out. If something is as legally binding as you appear to make out then it would come under the heading of 'contractual obligation' not 'collective agreements'.
Collective agreements are just that, areas of flexibility which can be easily changed without the requirement to re-issue contracts. Hence they are 'flexible', referred to as 'agreements' and are liable to change.
If the Union, in a time of crisis, cannot or will not agree to changes to fundamental agreements then I feel the company has the right to change them.
The statement:
instead it states the above ie Our Collective Agreements form part of our contract
is not true if the following statement:
These Agreements together with the Collective Agreements between the Company and the Trade Unions (all known as the Collective Agreements) and the Employment guide contain the terms and conditions of employment
is true as one states 'form part of' whilst the other states 'contain'. Semantics I know but in the eyes of the blind Ass of the law the two could be interpreted as worlds apart.
As to the load factors don't believe all you hear or read. A bunch of percentages tells us what we have always known, we are flying with fairly full aeroplanes, what is not in the public domain is the yield that is gleaned from the passenger loads. It is no use flying full aircraft where the passengers pay peanuts for the ticket. The only advantage is that those passengers give the peanuts to us and not a competitor!