There has been much mention on here of the nature of negotiations and the need for give and take. I agree that this is a cornerstone of successful negotiations between two parties who have a common interest.

In this case, the common interest is a pilot working agreement. The company will enjoy labor peace and predictable spending needs, efficiency and productivity under new FAA regs, and we might enjoy more financial and lifestyle benefits.

The Delta of 2012 is vastly different from the Delta of years past. Our contract has and will continue to reflect the BALANCE of the needs of the company to operate an airline in a changing regulatory and geopolitical environment, and our need as pilots to progress in our career financially and personally.

Let's get something straight here. Any "give and take" should reflect this paradigm, and no other. We should NOT be trading an arm for a leg, an eye for an eye, scope for pay, health benefits for vacation, trip credit for reserve x-days, or in other words, this is not a zero sum game.

I don't need to remind anyone here, or the MEC, or the Company that we all gave like a m******er at the office. We watched as our corporate leaders left with bags of cash as we tried to keep the water from coming over the gunnels. Our current corporate leaders are competent and committed to running a great operation. They have been and will continue to be compensated very handsomely for their effort--- as they should be.

Shouldn't we also be rewarded and compensated for our efforts in this endeavor? Aren't we at the "tip of the spear" every day, in every way? Do we not deserve and have we not earned the good living that this profession used to command?

I'm withholding my judgement of the agreement until I see it in its entirety and can view all the merits and drawbacks that it contains. Only then will I decide whether this represents a working agreement that reflects all of the above, or if it's merely a version of Hobson's Choice. If it's a winner, it will be one that will provide a career that I can count on to provide a good living, a decent chance at having a quality life when I'm not at work, and one that can provide for my family---college education and all, and one that will allow me to retire comfortably and securely.

So if "give and take" means that I am flexible with what I consider a fair agreement, that's fine. It's a total package, and I understand that. I understand that the company has new needs (new FAA regs, new equipment, global ops, technology advancements, etc...) But under no circumstances should we consider just giving up an important benefit or security provision simply because we are horse trading. We are not. We are discussing and negotiating a contract that in it's end state must be a major restoration of this career. Anything less would not be worthy of the term "compromise". I give %100 when I'm at work. This company and my colleagues are worth it. I expect that the negotiators on BOTH sides of the table will recognize that this is the asset they are putting a price tag on.