Originally Posted by
hoserpilot
Maybe, just maybe, our union would've gone back to the table and tweaked a few things. A no vote was not the doom and gloom end of the world starve for years scenario the union and lumbergs buddies made it out to be. A no vote would've forced the company back to the table. A no vote would mean the once spineless pilots wanted more and were willing to fight for it. A no vote would not delay those shiny 717's. I saw this same thing at skywest when Brad Holt asked me to deal him an ace. The Delta pilots were suckered just like those dumb rj pilots we pick on. We're supposed to be smarter, seasoned veterans....guess not.
Do you have any facts or recent history to support your position, or are you playing to your co-workers that are bigger suckers than those dumb rj pilots?
Here's some recent examples:
AFA at USAirways turned down their deal...it got worse. USAPA's governing body turned down their deal, and it got worse. While the final story hasn't been written, APA turned down their deal, and it got worse.
So in your world the "right" answer was to turn down the June 29 deal. You'd now be negotiating in an environment where AMR has 88 seat RJ scope (only using 79 seats at this time) imposed by the court. Nice.
You assert that the B717 were coming anyway, even though Delta management and ALPA told you there was a plan B. Isn't it strange that a Delta competitor "found" about half the number of used amall narrowbodies on the open market just a few short weeks after the TA was ratified. Or how about the capacity math that doesn't work for delivery of all 88 B717s without the deal? You trying to "sucker" somebody?