While I don’t disagree with you per se, let’s look at this with some perspective. Is 2 + 1 a big disappointment, yes. If we vote this down based on just that, the status quo remains the same, we start new negotiations with a new MEC probably, which will take what, at least 12-24 months? We know this TA was based off of the failed last one, and it still took over a year, without renegotiating all the sections. If this fails, the company wins, because we start from scratch, and the status quo remains unchanged, and the company doesn’t spend any more than they already were planning to. If we ratify it, we get a measly, slap in the face pay raise, but we also force them back to the table in 3, maybe 2 years. All this while the economy could falter, and we have zilch, might as well get something. Meanwhile we circle the wagons, get a new negotiating committee, and attack a new contract from scratch in a couple years. Does the situation suck? Absolutely, no arguments. As mentioned above, the company outplayed us, and here we are. As long as there are 0 concessions, I’m a soft yes, with the caveat that I haven’t seen the language, just like everyone else. Change the insurance 1 cent higher and I’ll be a no vote. Who knows, maybe some of the language / QOL / etc improved. I doubt it, because I think it would have been in the email, if I’m going to announce something, I’m including the big things, if all they included was 2+1, consider me underwhelmed. Rates aren’t everything, look at the whole package before passing judgement. Hell if I had to judge a pilot based on looks alone, I’d call the cops on half of ya.