That doesn't necessarily mean that a TA ought to be turned into a contract. Again, I assume you've heard it before, but maybe you're new: 84% of this pilot group voted yes on the last TA that is now our current contract.

Most of the pilot group now views our current contract as full of loopholes and lacking in some key areas. It took about 18 months after ratification for the grumbling to set in as the deficiencies in the contract really started to get old.

Arguably, the single best feature of our current contract - a 15% NEC (which started out as something like 13.2%) - was something that nearly every airline already had. "Bottom feeder" AirTran (how AirTran was thought of by most of the pilot group when the "acquisition" was announced had a B-Fund (NEC equivalent) for more than a decade before we got ours. As such, it was a layup for SWAPA to "achieve" a NEC last cycle but most in the pilot group viewed it as an unbelievable accomplishment on a par with the Spartans' performance at Thermopylaei because legend had it that Herb at some point in the previous century had said he'd never allow one at SWA. The "achievement" of a NEC at SWA was pointed to by nearly every yes voter and several SWAPA officials as a significant reason to vote yes.

There have been many other examples throughout history of the majority being wrong or off-base. It's not limited to SWAPA. So, if your suggesting that because most people are voting yes, that it's necessarily a good contract, that's fallacious. If you're saying the TA is going to pass, I agree with you though I'm voting no. I will not be surprised if the ratification vote exceeds 90% in favor.