I see, so for you, solving the problem takes a back seat to being able to b!tch about it. Fair enough. As I see it, the first "issue", that of the Age 65 rule change, took place prior to the second "issue", that of the "F" word, and although one does effect the other, they are/were separate issues. Seems to me that any solution to one will help the other. The union is not "asking" to let some retire so that others can "fly until they die", they are trying to not only help the junior guys stay on the property, but also to entice the older/super-senior guys to leave, thereby enhancing everyone else's seniority and therefore quality of life.

JJ