Originally Posted by
UALinIAH
I’m saying this CA publicly put out that he screwed up and is trying to make it right. He’s not out there every day playing used car salesman like the NC and Brad are and doubling down on this TA. So yes I think people screw up and when they own it sometimes they deserve a second chance. I may be in the minority and I’m as firm a No voter as you’ll find, but I still think second chances can be earned. I don’t care if it take 6-18 months. Our current contract is light years ahead on QOL/QOWL and I’d rather have it than the TA. If he believes what he wrote then he’s actually an asset to the pilots of C11.
Just my humble opinion.
I’ll put on my flame suit now lol
The question of course is, did the man see the light? Or merely feel the heat? It would seem like doing the job with due diligence would have precluded ANY of these people from voting for this proposal, so at a minimum you would have to say the individual was inept. Which then begs the question: Do you want someone inept representing you?
We are culturally hard-wired to want to support someone who has ‘learned the error of their ways’ but what if they are merely inept? Is that a risk that is acceptable?