Originally Posted by
tsquare
For example (and this is only a what if): Would you be opposed to allowing the 76 seaters to go to 80 seats if all the 50 seaters were to be removed from the inventory immediately upon signing,
Yes, because the 50 seaters are going away based on economics. We will have gained nothing and lost by allowing more seats to be outsourced.
Originally Posted by
tsquare
a reduction of those 80 seaters from 255 to 200
Still oppose because we will have shown a future arbitrator (yet again) that we were willing to allow more outsourcing of our jobs...if the price was right. This horrible precedent gets thrown in our face when we management's abuse of language we thought was "iron clad."
Originally Posted by
tsquare
and a signed purchase of a 100 seat airframe that would go to mainline?
Still oppose. Because as
you have so correctly said in the past, "I won't believe it until it's on the ramp painted with widgets and Delta pilots are sitting in the seats".
Originally Posted by
tsquare
I don't know if I would say no to something like that. I could come up with more too, but I think you might get my drift.
I hope you get my drift. You're giving our management credit for being straight-up guys who actually want to follow our contract. They do not deserve that level of credit.
Carl