That's fine. My position still stands. He goes out of his way, time after time to point out that dALPA has never voted no on anything (which isn't true btw... but that is an inconvenient little truth). His entire mantra for a long time has been one of voting down "the first offer" or "what management gives us". And here he goes again. AirTran were idiots for not taking SWA's oh-so-generous first offer, and we never do it? ANd yes you can draw parallels, because the leverage of which he speaks has to have a method of implementation... and just what would that be in this day and age?

So I'll ax you GG. Which is a better tack? It really is the crux of this discussion, and it has come into light over and over and over, and will probably continue to do so until Caplinger crawls back under whatever rock he came from.

This is the question: Do you want to continually swing for the fences, and say no to everything until you finally win, or would you rather take small incremental bites until you get there?

One is a decision based on emotion, the other on math.