Originally Posted by
Carl Spackler
It's an important distinction in your discussion with your mythical friend. You inferred that the MEC had been telling us all along that we would be getting a "conceptual" opener.
Inferred or stated no such thing. I never once stated the union communication had "history" of informing the group it'd be a conceptual opener. Show me where you understood that I said that.
Originally Posted by
Carl Spackler
And that your mythical friend didn't understand this "fact", then complained about how weak the opener looked...because he didn't bother to read the MEC's long-standing warnings that the opener would be conceptual. That's simply not true.
Stop adding words Carl. I never once said that it was "long-standing warnings" from the union. (Quite unbecoming that you're making stuff up.)
The only "fact", that I eluded to in my example, was that my friend hadn't read the "Negotiator's Notepad". His disappointment in the opener was because he hadn't realized it was different than the opener the company received.
GJ