I remember reading somewhere that the company didn't intend to use the A330-300 on legs over 12 hours, so they didn't really think the condo or whatever was necessary.

What you'll need to learn to get your blood pressure down is that management runs the airline, we fly it. While we are lucky to have the CROT and a relatively robust Fatigue Risk Management plan, we may not have the right to disagree with the company, in the eyes of an arbitrator.

This helpful tidbit may assist as well. An arbitrator must rule based on past precedent, the contract itself, negotiating history, as well as his own gut feelings. If there was nothing binding him to an A330-300 Class I facility, then he was forced to rule based on - you guessed it - anything but the whims of the pilot group.

I was a yes voter. I did my own analysis. In fact I didn't pay much attention to the junk that spewed forth from the company, or ALPA, because it was all spin. The contract is solid, and I think it was a good step in the right direction. It made me happy - and don't forget it's in the company's best interest to only impress 51% of the pilot group so - I guess I'm glad to be in the slight majority? What do you want me to say? I'm so sorry I voted yes and that I expressed my opinion in the interest of an affirmative vote and I repent for my sins which resulted in just as much stagnation as we would have had otherwise?