Regardless of whether you can live in a 600 sq ft apt in CDG, or what tax benefit the company ends up with, the most jaw-dropping part of the LEC 99 update to me was this gem:

I feel a certain level of frustration when the company puts information out in which they imply that the union was involved in all aspects of developing this proposal, as I am reasonably certain that no one from the union visited Paris or Hong Kong with company officials for the purpose of fact-finding. In my opinion, it is misleading to the pilot group when the company makes such statements.

I am also confused about some of the statements surfacing lately on how we ended up with the enhanced option. We ended up with this package because that is what the company offered and we took it. That’s it. I don’t recall the company starting any lower or the union countering any higher.

Is this true? YGBSM!! Our union leaders, elected to look out for the best interests of its members, didn't even bother to put forward a counteroffer? Didn't actually visit CDG or HKG with the company for fact finding? Yet they have the balls to tell us this is the best we could get, trust them, it's really a good deal for the group? Someone please tell me EI just made a typo or I'm reading this incorrectly. Is it possible a member of the MEC like EI just wasn't aware that these things did indeed happen and nobody from the union told him?

If this is really true, to me it's the biggest indictment of our MEC leaders yet. Wish I could vote no more than once.