Satch;
I know this is where you stand. There are economics of pay. DAL88 quoted a 1/2 cent per seat mile increase for AMR's restoration. A half cent makes a huge difference when the amount of seat miles is where they are here. 1/2 cent is a 10% increase the the CASM on a 753 or a 744 (8-11.5%) It does add up.

Their point is junior boy, become a man, get furloughed, it is just the way it is. Not sure how that benefits the group, but they say it does. I agree the logical gains are what is needed, not emotional demands longing for yesteryear. If restoration Plus is logical at the time we slip our Section Three demands across the table, then great. If not, then lets not do it. (Not settling Carl, just wanting to move the ball down the field to get out of under what many are complaining about besides just pay)

May guys seem to be myopic on the hourly rates, and in the next breath complain about the work rules, retirement, vacation, sick bank, and a plethora of other items. I say, if you can get a sizable increase in pay while fixing most if not all of that on Jan 1,2013, and then be back at the table three to four years later, does it not make sense to do so? We could the ball down the field immediately wrt to a moderate increase of pay, and get these work rules fixed so that the QOL issues get fixed, work rules, reserve et al get fixed, and as a result the pay goes up, and the money gets in to our pockets today and not in five to seven years. It would be safe to assume that we would take the same road as APA and take at least as long to get to the same place. Why not do it with two contract cycles and the logic of time valuation of money?

It is not selling out, it is a tactic that has worked for many corporations and individuals alike. It allows us to recoup a lot quickly and not suffer any longer with the changes in how we work. It allows the company to know its costs going forward, allowing more WB jets, more NB jets, and the ability for our airline to grow and prosper. Not on our backs, but by doing things smartly.

We always can go back to X or bust if the company does not want to play ball.

Many like to hammer I and others on this principle, and it is OK to disagree. It is one method to employ, and many think it is the method that will help this group the most. Time will tell what we eventually do, but until then, it is fun debating the issue.