Originally Posted by ChrisJT6

We've all suffered loss of dignity and financial strength, but when it comes to voting on a business contract, I would suggest putting emotions aside and looking at this vote as a business transaction that for me rests purely on whether I think we can do better.
I disagree that Jeff needed to come to the table, they were happy dragging this on, playing pleasant welcome aboard videos...followed by getting our backside kicked by our competitor. They came to the table because the NMB forced the issue...if voted down and another NMB assignee is called on after a long cooling off period there is a good chance he or she may not be sympathetic to our cause.
I am as fired up angry about what has happened to all of us in varying degrees, but when I fly or do business...I don't do them with emothion. It never works out good. For those that have decided already to vote NO...I say Jeff most likely has offerred a CBA that is at least the same overall package $$ amount as the Delta CBA and you won't have much of a leg to stand on when your screaming bloody murder to Mitt's Bain NMB appointee. I agree that all of the issues people want to fight over are important, but it must come down to do you think you can do better? Is it worth 3-12mts pay to fight for $200mil more in retro/lump sum payout while Jeff pockets $800mil in delayed CBA savings? I can look past a few dollars less in straight pay if I win having more money at the end of the day via larger B/C funds that bring real tax advantages over the DAL CBA...keep an open mind, be smart and do the math. If you aren't happy but don't think you can do better without net harming yourself...you can vote yes and not help Jeff while making a stand. But come out voicing you are not happy with the CBA.