Again, where this mindset runs into trouble is that we negotiate things that benefit select portions of our labor group all the time. RSV rule improvements, trip credit protections, int’l override, commuter benefits, check airman/TK pay, to name a few. It’s just too big a tent to cover everyone at the same time. And yet, every time one of these things comes up, someone starts in with, “Well, I don’t want my negotiating capital blah, blah, blah…”

We’ve got to get past this mentality that a benefit is only a benefit if everyone gets it. Otherwise we never fix reserve, we never improve trip quality, we leave the TK guys out to dry. In fact, there’s only one benefit that universally applies to all 15,000 of us & that’s pay; and the one thing we all seem to agree on is that we don’t want a contract that focuses solely on pay. So we need to embrace this patchwork approach & stop begrudging each other our respective areas of focus if we want a truly excellent contract. (The irony of the FO in your example is that he will most likely ultimately end up enjoying the benefit he voted against & paying the associated penalty he voted to impose upon others- all in the name of “fairness”.)

That means there will be some things in this contract I benefit from more than others. There will be other things I won’t presently benefit from, but will probably benefit from in the future. And there will be some things I’m very unlikely to ever benefit from at all. I want all of those things.