Originally Posted by
El10
We have reached the same tipping point as national politics in that the louder voice can decree thier position as fact. This is not to say that the louder voice is not correct, just that volume has a higher weight than facts at times.
When ever the next TA is put out either by this MEC, a new MEC or the DPA MEC we will have the same issues. The root cause being able confirm "what" is fact and what is is "speculation". Either side (Pro/Con) can make a claim as fact and repeat it enough times that it is believed to be sound. So how does the quieter voice get heard if the other side has changed the facts? Is it time to have a neutral party fact check each position? Maybe we grade the costing at the amendable date to see how well the company and E&FA did on costing. Or do we count all the "they never will"/"they will" claims and keep a track record of each side?
What do you guys think some options?
Since I doubt you'll see another TA for at least six months, you can compare what the ALPA guys said would happen if the recent TA was turned down, as opposed to what Team No said, and see whose predictions proved more accurate -- then going forward, you might listen to those who were right.
So far, the unofficial spokesperson for Team No (gzsg) is 0 for 2. He said we'd have another TA within 48 hours, and he said the E190s were here to stay.
JMO.