I disagree. And to set the record straight, I reversed my feelings on this after the B6 TA got negotiated with a catch-up provision. I think that there is more that can be squeezed out this time even with a potential JCBA looming and now will be a ‘no’ vote because the JCBA can’t be depended upon before it actually passes DOJ muster. Now having said that, my no vote without a catch-up provision really is more about hedging the bet against DOJ disapproval than about believing this is a ‘turd’ because I think the NC actually did a pretty good job with the marching orders they were given, it’s just that the successes scored by B6 and DA have sort of changed the strategic outlook. I think we now have the ability to insist on a catch-up provision so we won’t be eternally trapped in lag by one contract cycle if the merger/acquisition falls through. It’ll also make us less attractive to Franke if that happens.

But other people are going to make other rational choices, some because they actually don’t plan on sticking around long enough to benefit. One can hardly expect someone who already has a legacy CJO and anticipates a class date 3 months out to vote to reenter negotiations rather than take a 1 Jan raise. Other people will make rational decisions to vote yes for other reasons. I’m now hoping the “No” voters prevail, but certainly don’t believe those who vote yes are weak or fearful or even uninformed. Some are just more comfortable with the proverbial “bird in hand…”. That’s not bad, just a different value judgment than mine.

It takes all kinds to make a world.