We're all on the same team but we have different ideas about what we can and should achieve. The predominant thinking within our MEC is that the kind of improvements it would take to restore the standard of living provided by our compensation in the 1980's, 1990's, and early 2000's would be "unreasonable" and therefore unattainable. In other words, bankruptcy was a reset. But they know that if they came out and actually SAID that, they'd have a problem. So instead, they make their objective (mission statement) nebulous so that ANY improvement they get can satisfy it. And they work to lower expectations for those of us who believe restoration is appropriate and worth at least a try.

I know I've said all that a thousand times... but I still haven't seen anything from DALPA that would make me change my mind about it.