Sorry B*ver the clause applies to you just as much as it does DH
Love it when HCBMs add stupid clauses to their agreements to f*ck with their ex and then get bit in the @ss by them in the long run.
Beaver INSISTED that there be clause in the event of work conflicts the other parent gets first right of refusal. This was done because Beaver only worked 15-20 hours a week and wanted to BE SURE that Dh didn't put the kids with someone "she didn't know". That and Beaver "ass"umed that DH would continue in a job like he had while married to her that required him to travel. He travelled because he didn't want to be at home with her.
Now..right after the divorce DH changed to a better job that didn't require he travel but maybe a weekend a year. That was it...clause became moot for him. About 5 years ago, DH switched to positions that he could work from home. Clause is now really moot for DH.
In the meantime, Beaver went from working 15 to 20 to working full time when that oh so sweet $600 per month alimony (or as DH called I f*ck a b*tch money) ran out. Not only that she lost the one job she had that could work from home. You know, they actually require you to do you know work. So now Beaver has to go to work and isn't home all day and DH is at home.
Now....she thinks this clause if ridiculous. Of course it is...since it applies to her and not DH. The clause is now vague and it should apply. Hahahaha...
Ha...and she squwaked about Dh being in comtempt for keeping SD for the whole day and half and that he doesn't care about being in comtempt. Nope..DH doesn't since you assualted SD.
Dh also told Beaver he does not want GWR to transport SD in his car unless she can provide a clean drug test for GWR. (which we know she cannot). Till then DH does not want SD riding in a car with a documented drug user.
Beaver is slapping her beaver tail so hard now it's not even funny. DH could careless...