Even better, here's a portion of the C20 update:

• The Negotiating Committee told the MEC last week that neither pay nor Profit Sharing (PS) had been discussed with the Company.
• Emphasizing….the MEC has not been briefed about any pay rate discussions nor Profit Sharing (PS) trade for pay (“monetization”, “reducing ‘at-risk’ compensation”, or any other favored euphemism) proposals from the Company.

Carl's comment: Does this mean pay proposals haven't been exchanged with management? No. Have we given the negotiating committee the direction regarding pay? Yes. Could we be very close to a deal on pay? Yes. Could the negotiating committee sign off on a TA that includes the rumored pay/profit sharing proposals without returning to the MEC for further direction? Yes.

• We, the C20 reps, also don’t know if we are close to a deal. We also believe that is the case with the other members of the MEC.
• The MEC hasn’t been substantively briefed on, nor discussed, the current status of negotiations relative to our own (ALPA's) list of items which were included and referred to in ALPA’s Contract Opener.

Carl's comments: Our MEC has NOT been substantively briefed on the current status of negotiations. Our MEC does NOT know whether we are close to a deal. Reps who say we haven't discussed pay are only repeating how they are told to answer that question. The reps are not doing so based on personal knowledge from a proper BRIEFING by the MEC administration.

• There's certainly always the possibility that some may know more than we do, but use extreme caution when considering online info and rumors.

Carl's comments: Always a great idea.

• The MEC received a short notice (same day) visit from senior management, about which the MEC received minimal pre-briefing relative to the details of their presentation, which, of course, is confidential.
  
• Although we did encounter some serious process problems last week, we still believe that there remains an opportunity for an appropriately positive result.

Carl's comments: This bears out exactly what I've been hearing. Specifically, the MEC administration is completely dysfunctional...far WORSE than when Kingsley Roberts was recalled and during the CDO fiasco. Donatelli is viewed as nothing more than a memo writer and stater of buzzwords like "historic contract" etc. He has no control or respect from other MEC administrators. This has led to the SPC chairman and other administrators trying to broker a deal with management directly, then having the negotiating committee simply signing the TA knowing it would (yet again) put the reps in a no-win situation and would likely pass by a 10-9 margin. The rumors we are hearing are from one or two MEC administrators (likely from a negotiating committee member) that is appalled at what he is seeing. The leak is an attempt to still salvage a proper process instead of another cram down.

• We also still believe that the MEC has the ability to stop, alter or re-direct a quick, unsatisfactory deal or any unsatisfactory deal for that matter. A fast deal is certainly good as long as it doesn’t negatively affect the results. Accelerating a deal subject to what could be questionable or false deadlines and compromising the overall result is not a good idea.

Carl's comments: Regardless of these reps' beliefs, they only have the ability to stop, alter or redirect a quick unsatisfactory deal by voting DOWN a Section 6 TA signed with management. That will NOT happen. The reps don't have the votes to do that. It's still 10-9.

• We still believe that ALPA / DALPA has the ability to deliver a deal that appropriately recognizes the pilot group’s contributions to the Company’s current level of success, as well as the many sacrifices in pay, benefits, retirement, quality of life, and career progression / stagnation that were made during the “lost decade”.

Carl's comments: The extreme dysfunction among our own MEC administration is making this look increasingly unlikely. Our MEC chairman is completely disrespected, and is being outflanked. The people doing it may well see it as the better option compared to a public recall and replacement of the chairman in the middle of Section 6

What a mess.

Carl