There are those, when being robbed, who wish to take the best offer from the robber, or to capitulate entirely.

I can recall a captain that attempted to suggest to negotiators on both sides that he felt pilots were given too much per diem. He said he thought pilots didn't deserve better than McDonalds. The company loved him. The membership did not.

The notion of taking the best no-good offer the company hash made, and passing that out as acceptable for a vote, doesn't hold much water. That's life on a sinking ship, and deciding which hole below the waterline is acceptable.

A negotiation is just that, but it's not a surrender. It's not a solicitation to see what the company will give. It's a bargaining process, and there's a reason that unions exist to do this, bargaining collectively on behalf.

When the company makes an offer that's unacceptable and the union gives it to the membership anyway, it carries a ratification by the union and a tacit approval that lends credibility to the unacceptable. The notion that membership won't vote it in if it's bad is naive and disregards the credence given by the union when putting it out for a vote. Don't put out for a vote what isn't acceptable. People vote for presidents and politicians frequently with whom they're not satisfied, because it's the least of many evils on the ballot.

Don't put evils on the ballot. If something is unacceptable, don't knuckle under with the thinking that it's the best you can get. It's not so. The company walks away from the negotiating table precisely because they hope to hear voices like Frank's, telling people to vote for the crumbs the company has tossed. Don't pander to the other side. It's weakness, and it won't get you the contract you want.

Been there, done that.