Copied this from another forum. It makes sense and I agree.

"Rob,

Thanks again for taking the time yesterday to talk about the T/A; I know you LEC guys are putting in a lot of time on the phones.

Despite our conversation, I am still planning to vote "NO" on this T/A as is. I'm not afraid of the alleged veiled threats by the NMB to "park" us for any amount of time; the reality is that the NMB wants to see a deal on the table as soon as possible too, so parking any party is not a realistic outcome.

Contrary to the fear of encountering a long delay in a renegotiated deal, I am confident that three substantial changes could be made that would swing my vote. All three of these changes would require minimal revision, and would not require give-and-take (other than the Company gives some more, and we take down our strike):

1. SCOPE: LOWER THE THRESHOLD / CAP TO 123 76-SEATERS. By far the most abhorrent provision, we should have a 20% lower threshold than Delta on 76 seat RJ's for triggering the addition of new United small narrowbodies. That threshold currently stands at 153 76-seaters, and should be lowered to 122. Keep in mind that Delta made their agreement by bringing a 717 order to the table; United has NO airplanes on the horizon in relation to this trigger.

2. PAY: REDUCE THE DELTA DISPARITY IN 2013. Pay is not the most important aspect of this agreement to me, but the quickest and easiest way to improve the bargain is to reduce or eliminate the disparity in Delta pay on January 1, 2013. Even if we narrowed the gap to 4% beginning in January, that would at least be a token from the Company that would win my vote.

3. RETRO: PUT $120 MILLION OF EQUITY ON THE TABLE. We cannot continue to reward foot-dragging in this industry with 24 to 36 month amendable periods. The total lump sum amount offered by the company is paltry, and it is NOT 100% retro, 91% retro, or anything close to that number, and the MEC knows it. As we discussed, I think that the MEC's failure to provide a retro "snapshot" continues to be disingenuous. There is no reason that the Company could not add $120 million in newly-issued, restricted stock to the combined pilot group, to be vested over the period of the agreement.

All three of these changes can be completed in less than a week, and more likely in one day.

We took a strike vote for a reason: to ensure that management knows that we have the resolve to obtain an INDUSTRY-LEADING agreement. Unless we have lost that resolve, we owe it to ourselves to send this agreement back for the improvements listed above.

I WILL BE VOTING NO."


I agree, and will also vote NO until there is more on the table for our combined pilot group.