I don't think he sounds bitter. I think that he sounds pragmatic. You, on the other hand sound defensive.

It sounds like there's two work groups, the haves and the have nots. Maybe he's been on the receiving end of all those predictable business decisions. It's obvious that the decisions are designed to benefit the shareholders at the expense of employees and their families. It's only business. That's understandable and predictable. You're right about that. But, you have to ask yourself, who are some of the biggest shareholders or soon to be big shareholders when their options are in the money.

Now, the weak-dick pilot group, that's another problem. It sounds like Alaska seeks out people who are willing to settle for less in exchange for being in God-given SEA. It sounds like your flight attendants have more balls than the pilots. At least the FAs voted their contact down.

The pilots on the other hand signed a weak 5-yr deal that'll leave them so far behind everyone else in 5 yrs that it'll be mathematically prohibitive to catch up. To add insult to injury, the contract offered enough productivity increases to further postpone and eliminate hiring and upgrades. You guys really boned your FOs and junior CAs on that one. Meanwhile, Alaska is announcing record profit after record profit.

On the positive side, your profit sharing bonus amounts to an extra 8 percent pay. Hopefully for you guys, that keeps coming. But, if Alaska makes one of those business decisions that you rationalize as predictable, it'll be gone in time. I'd rather have the pay in my payscale as opposed to a bonus subject to formulas that can and will be "adjusted" by management.

I readily acknowlege, that I like many pilots, am a prostitute. But, I am NOT a CHEAP prostitue. If I were going to be looking at a 15-yr upgrade at Alaska because I was surrounded by too many weak-dicks who sell their vacations and work extra for straight time, I'd consider someplace else first. At least SWAPA and the SWA captains acknowledged the 15-yr upgrade and gave the FOs a higher percentage of CA pay. At least at UAL I have a 787 as a higher-paying senior FO option. The same will never happen at Alaska. It's a CA airline where their actions say eff the FOs.

On he otherhand, If I were a horizon FO with no PIC turbine and I could never leave to go to SWA in the future, or if I were a nepotism candidate with Parker Pen time or I were an affirmative action candidate, I would settle for less and ASA is the place for me. I'd consider myself lucky to be anywhere, let alone sleeping in my own bed in SEA, PDX or ANC and I'd keep cashing the checks. And when my son or daughter were old enough, I'd get him or her a job too.