Reasonable points Motch. I'm not as good as you are at breaking out the quotes, so I'm just going to ramble.

I definitely wasn't suggesting that the present TA IS the best we can possibly get. I was merely pointing out that the op's suggestion that you can ALWAYS get better on a second go is inaccurate. I'll wait for the roadshow to hear from the people in the room with the NMB what their opinion is on flexibility from them. The rest of us are merely speculating in one direction or another.

AMR has a new TA in the works. We will see what happens there. It appears to be better, but I'm not sure they will vote this one in either. I hope for their sake they do get a better deal. And for ours!!

I don't necessarily agree that this TA "shows us what the company thinks of us, and what our own Union feels we're willing to accept." I think it shows what kind of leverage we have been able to extract. Have we used ALL our leverage? Don't know. I'll see in the roadshow.

Have you looked at the contract comparison guide? Compared to our peers, I don't think it's as egregious as it is made out to be on this forum. Certainly not perfect. Good enough? I don't know yet. I want to hear what the Union has to say about it.

With regard to the retro: I get it. I truly do. And I know what I'm owed down to the $$. Philosophically, I agree that it's up to the union to convince the NMB that we deserve the whole $1.2B. Of course, while we are doing that, it goes to $1.3B.... then $1.4B. Really though, you and I talking about retro philosophy doesn't mean anything. It is going to come down to what the NMB decides we "deserve". We can stomp our feet and pound our fists, and it might help. Then again, it might not. "As a Continental Pilot, I know what I'm owed for the past four years. Every Pilot should now. It's simple. Take the hours you flew, times what your were paid. The do the same with Delta Rates. The difference is the Loan. And that doesn't include missed B Fund, lost days off, rolled days, double pumps, lost International override, coach crew rest seats, etc..."

Turning down this TA means that you continue to get hosed by all these things. For how long? A month? A year? 5 years? Although it's a different animal, I think most of us would agree that the USAirways guys were foolish when they decided to "take a stand" like they did.

$400 million doesn't sound like "too much" to me. It sounds like "not enough". Not NEARLY enough. But.... how does $400 million sound to the NMB? I think it's important to remember that we only see things from the pilots perspective. We see things through the glasses of 10 years of getting bent over by this absolutely disgrace of a company. But that isn't the perspective that the NMB has. Their opinion, like it or not, matters. A 99% strike vote is impressive, and clearly made a mark. But we've spent several YEARS applying pressure to the company, and this is where we ended up. So how many more YEARS of pressure do we need to apply to get to 100% retro, UPS pay rates, 5 hours/day vacation, 50 seat scope, etc. etc. etc?

Despite it's warts, this TA is going to be substantially more expensive for the company than our current contracts... loss of synergy included. I have no doubt they would be MORE than happy to start the process of negotiating over again and work on it for another several years.

I haven't made up my mind how I'm voting yet. I want to go to a roadshow, talk to my reps, and hear as much as I can about the process, the consequences of a "no" vote, and the "inside scoop" about the NMB's position. I'm MUCH more inclined to vote NO than I was now that Obama has been re-elected.

You've made up your mind. I respect that. You are offended at the company's lack of respect for us. I respect that. Get used to it. I just want to make sure that I have absolutely as much information as I can get my hands on before I make a decision.