Originally Posted by Sink r8

The problem isn't that they're asking us, but it's a combination of putting a concessionary item on the table AND the manner in which they're asking us to consider it. We're not given cleanopportunities to specify whether or not we want to go down a specific path. We're being asked:

Do you want to go down this path if other airlines are doing it?
Do you want to go down this path if we can make improvement A?
Do you want to go down the path if we can make improvement B?
Do you not want to go down this path?

You might get 65% of people to answering "no" to a straight-up Yes/No on CDO's, but you might bet 35% yes votes to line up with 8% that "A" is a good mitigating strategy, 8% that think "B" is a good mitigating strategy, and bingo, you have 51% saying they want CDO's with some improvement.

This is exactly the way Prater's guys pulled off the claim of support for Age 65.

This is a very poor survey, IMO. I'm a supporter of our union, but this doesn't meet standards of intellectual honesty. It smells of a few guys wanting OOBS and trying to push them through, a few others wanting CDO's, and whatever other pet items people fought over.

I expected much better.