Originally Posted by
Regularguy
Guam guy:
Both MECs have posted info about this. But in a nut shell after agreeing to a mid-June timeline (they all assumed mid-June this year
) the negotiating group working on R&I was making progress and then after a break the UCH boys came back and annulled all the progress and returned to their Oct 2010 position.
Essentially the UCH team withdrew their position after agreements had been made at the table and combine this with the time table of mid-June they are negotiating in bad faith in the mediated talks.
Regular,
While I agree on the R&I issue being talked about by both sides, I haven't seen the "mid-June" date mentioned by the UAL MEC that was referenced in the CAL MEC update. Can you point me to that one because I could have missed it.
Anyway, my opinion of the CAL update was that it was a masterpiece of political crap and non-commital by any measure. Again, my opinion.
Rather than put stipulations on when they would support a request for release, they should have just stated that they will co-file a request for release on 30 April if the company doesn't commit to a 1 June deadline.
Wow, that would have taken all of one sentence for them to write.
Frats,
Lee