Originally Posted by
Raptor
Her initial post wasn't that good. But, her Go-Around post was. I say that because it counters the emotional yes vote with reasoning that could sway. It won't do anything towards a reasoned yes vote.
The emotional yes vote is the one that worries about the future if this is voted down. If you don't like it now, you really won't like it over the next 10 years! FedEx has show us even in soft or poor economies that 3% is a raise we will get (reference the two bridge contracts recently). The NC chairman references 3% as the norm in his videos too.
If this TA is turned down, expect 3% to be preserved as a typical raise amount. The money that will be lost is the new, higher bonus which won't quite reflect 3%--just like this one didn't. If someone is voting yes just because they will lose some money if they vote no, I guess nothing will sway them.
My Die Trying, work rules given up, and QOL given up are much more important to me than some $$s. I'm living fine now and am not so bad off that I'm willing to trade QOL for $$. I don't know what the economy will do, I don't know if the next TA will be one I like either, but I KNOW this is a TA I don't like.
So now rather than say that the yes voters are spineless ball less cowards, we will call them emotional wrecks in need of estrogen therapy? Reading these posts, I have got to tell you, it is the no votes that are sounding a little like an out take from Mean Girls 3. Say what you want, it is a completely logical, rational choice to see the gains in this TA balanced against the hint and hope of doing better next time. There are pros and cons with either vote; one choice is not more rational than the other.
If you hire a guy to fix your basement from flooding, and he recommends going with a sump pump, it is completely logical to say no thanks I'm going to get a second opinion. Just don't be surprised when your basement floods and the next guy also recommends a sump pump and now new dry wall.