Originally Posted by
1234
I was being sarcastic, guess it didn't come across that way even though I used a
. Just stating that the original poster made it seem like this 717 deal is a lot better for the company than ALPA thought. Original poster implied that it will save the company $750 million next year alone. I believe the article is not written well because I have to believe, as stated by shiznit, that the savings must be from the entire refleeting project. There is no way that just 16 airplanes (717's) next year are going to save us that kind of money. My thoughts anyway.
I agree with you. Sorry I missed your point. I can't keep looking for ghosts in the closet, or whining because I feel that if the company is able to save money that somehow there is a direct connection to some sort of failure on the negotiator's part. It is stupidly naive to do so. IF our deal was part of a bigger deal that allows the company to save... make money.. I can't see how that is a bad thing.