Alan,
As an aside, there will likely always be a price to be paid for going back to amend an agreement once the initial handshake is complete. That is the downside of turning down a TA. That is not to say that we should simply rubberstamp everything our reps do, but we need to recognize that it's not as simple as it might otherwise sound.
Carl: 1. CDO's originated from a special select sub committee of the scheduling committee, not a 4 year old defeated LEC resolution. The subcommittee inserted CDO's into the negotiating wish list. Reps found out about CDO's during their initial meetings to give direction. The reps' direction included strict limitations and provisions to any CDO's. the TA did not include those limits. Reps that were upset about their guidance being ignored were bolstered by a nearly record flood of angry emails and calls. After initially fighting the MEC, the NC went back to the company and made the changes.
The way to avoid this is to hold the NC accountable to bring back a TA that is strictly within the negotiating "box" directed by the Reps. The way it's supposed to work if they can't is to come back to the Reps for clarification or redirection, NOT get a TA that is outside one of the box parameters and then put the MEC in the position of accepting something less than directed or voting it down at a possible cost. Lather, rinse, repeat as necessary.
This is now the second time the Scrappy/Admin team has brought some item back less than directed and it is is completely unacceptable. It doesn't matter how good the rest is. They work for the elected status Reps and are duty bound to follow their direction. Signing a TA and dumping it in the Reps lap with less than the directed parameters to play on the fear of "we'll do worse, RA won't be happy with us, you'll undercut the NC, we can't have 19 negotiators in the room, etc, etc," is simply unacceptable. We managed to do better on this TA, but didn't make it that far on C2012.
The pilot group is supposed to be facing management on the other side of the table, with the MEC representing their will as embodied by the direction given by their elected status Reps. If that is not followed 100% it is not a good omen for a "historic" C2015
