In the video attached to the email, Heppner said that they almost walked away from negotiations twice. He then said that they were too far apart on what either party wanted with respect to Reserve Rule improvements. Instead of walking away, he "struck it from the negotiation." So, the list of 5 items shrank by at least one.
It just seems a little devisive. Would he have "walked away" if they didn't get what they wanted for the long haul operations?
I will admit, the pay rates look appealing. I even made an effort to try to look at them last, but failed. I am still voting no. I feel there was a bait and switch..especially regarding the reserve rules:
From the 21 Oct Letter:
i. Compensation
ii. Retroactive longevity for furloughess for pay and vacation
iii. MOU 22 replacement
iv. Reserve assignment process improvements
v. FRMS
and a few paragraphs down:
This one thing must be clear: The MEC, Negotiating Committee, and I are completely aware that any agreement has to meet your exacting standards. If such an agreement is reached and accepted by the MEC, it will undoubtedly significantly affect pay and/or working conditions which will require Membership Ratification.
undoubtedly affect pay and/or working conditions. This does not affect Reserve working conditions.
Expect more...pay less