Originally Posted by Route66

Where? What I SAID was that the "old" union mentally that YOU obviously espouse was simply living in the past. Unionist HAVE to change. Obviously that would NOT include you it seems.

You can't understand it because you can't or WON'T read the history.



I didn't DEMAND. What I said is we HAVE a contract (MOU), Parker is under NO obligation to GIVE US MORE and if we wish to improve what we've ALREADY NEGOTIATED then drawing lines in the sand like "hell no to scope relief (whatever your vision of that is or isn't) for example and just going to arbitration and taking what we have without ANY review, analysis and back and forth instead of DRAWING A LINE IN THE SAND is a fools errand. We have to come back in five or six years to blend the pilot group over time so the union will have more negotiation strength. But you and yours want it all and they want it now.



You think they are meaningless and that may BE your opinion but there are many others and apparently even the union that have LEFT their hardline stance these past few weeks, sticking the rhetoric aside and actually TRYING to come up with some sort of JCBA that somehow salvages SOME possible remuneration for the pilots with a contract that the Company will be happy to honor as is if that is what the UNION wants. But that is not practical NOR prudent on behalf of the pilots. You obviously believe otherwise and if others don't agree with YOU then be prepared to incur the wrath. NO?



What I SAID was that the ONLY WAY you were going to effectuate a JCBA on the back of an already agreed to MOU was to negotiate with the Company and salvage SOME renumeration that we would not normally get because of the cost neutral provision of arbitration in the MOU OR....since the Company has SAID that they did better than they expected they were willing to accelerate pilot pay with 8 (now seven) caveats that the union should look at before they slap the Company with their "glove" and challenge them to a dual. But what I saw then still doesn't change my mind that it was a good deal. It WAS AND IS in comparison to the MOU.



Could it possibly be that you are so set in your "ways" that logic, reason and READING COMPREHENSION are simply beyond your grasp? And could it be that you were SO FOCUSED on somehow beating me over the head with your, lets just say EXTREME myopic, views are probably why we have an inferior contract in the first place. NO?

Go back if you dare, read what I posted (you won't) and what many others here were posting. I already know what you said.

Let's face it. You don't like me because I won't tell you YOUR truth.

I guess your mirror is broken.