Anthrax

This is cut and paste off a post from jetflyers FB:
Probably my last post until my next post, and this post will be from a guy I have huge respect for because his opinions align with my own, and this guy really gets it, because this guy is me.
First, I get all teary-eyed like Terrell Owens defending his “quarterback” Tony Romo when folks attack my rep, Anita Shew. “That’s my rep, man. Don’t you see? That’s my rep!”
Yeah, I read her letter; I’ve read all the letters, and I even managed to read the TA, the latter of which, I do declare, the union must have sent out two difference versions. How does the TA I’m reading support an enthusiastic two thumbs up? So I’m confused, but that’s okay, I’m a Marine. Believe me, life was easier when the Corps told me what to wear and what to eat and whom to kill, but I digress.
My rep didn’t attack the negotiating committee. She pointed out a path going forward should this TA (or at least the version I’m reading) fail; much like our MEC Vice Chairman, Captain Cardacci did with his most recent comm. I think we call all agree 100 percent that our NC and subcommittees et al. worked hard, and so can we all agree to graduate past the notion that to question their results somehow condemns their efforts?
When folks tell me that I’m making an emotional decision, it gets me so mad I want to pull my hair out! I want to hold my breath and stomp my feet.
Yet … I am curious as to the origin of the notion that the best decisions have no basis in emotion. This, of course, leveled by several in the Yes camp, which, in my opinion, is a bit hypocritical, given how so much of their argument rests upon fear. What if this doesn’t pass? What if we lose money waiting on TA 2.0? What if the company wet leases? Who will step up to the plate to continue negotiations?
I would like to counter the negative, albeit powerful emotion of fear with the positive emotion that I see in the No camp. (Funny how the Yes here is negative, and the No positive.) Within the No camp, I read optimism for a better future. I read a unified group willing to fight for the love of their profession. I see little capitulation of that which we find in the Yes camp, this notion that yeah, I wanted more, and yeah, I’m disappointed, but shucks, this is the best we can do and so we might as well make the best of it, for me. Within the No camp, I see a fight against the direction our corporations are taking in America, and so I see a noble cause. Yeah, hokey for you Yes guys, but I’m a hokey, optimistic kind of guy! In the No camp, I see a group of folks who are seeing the erosion of their quality of lives; a group that has committed themselves to this company, and are asking not for what they deserve, but for what they have EARNED. A group that has spent countless hours and years on their profession, who are proud to work at FedEx, and who are feeling, perhaps, a bit disenfranchised. A group who wants to say to their kids and the youngsters thinking on becoming a pilot to go ahead and like Michael Jordan just do it, and when you get the hours come work for FedEx, ‘cause it’s awesome here, you’ll love it.
Someone said we are part owners in this company, but that is a false analogy when the trend in our country is ownership to shareholders, and workers are mere cost centers.
So yeah, I’ll say it: this is how the No camp is feeling, feelings of an almost human nature, but that doesn’t negate our analytical minds, nor blind us to the words we have read, the concessions, the loopholes.
Lastly, Terrell was wrong to shed any tears for Tony Romo. Tony Romo sucks!