Originally Posted by
DAL 88 Driver
The problem is that you do not have a patent on facts. Nobody (including you) can predict the future of the economy, our industry, or our company with any certainty. If you want to try and rationalize the unprecedented, draconian cuts we took a few years ago and that we continue today (well after bankruptcy was over), well I'm sorry but I'm not going to agree with you that that was/is rational or appropriate. If you want to tie our pay to the up and down cycles of this industry and this company's profits and losses, then go right ahead and continue advocating that we do that. If that's innovative or forward thinking in your mind, well I would submit that you have pretty low expectations of the future of this profession. Did you have these low expectations when you got into this career? Or have you changed your mind? It couldn't be that you're afraid to really fight for it because you're more afraid that you could lose it all, is it? Was that enough of a "taunt" for you? LOL
Well, if you want to taunt, then I can guarantee you that I have done more fighting for this profession than you have. So, if you are really committed, get from behind your keyboard and do something as opposed to just complain about the efforts of others. Until then, your taunts are hollow and have no meaning.
As for the rest of your post, then either you didn't read what I wrote, you can't understand what I wrote, or you just deliberately alter the meaning in your reply. I think I was clear in saying that our compensation could go way up if market conditions are right. I haven't lowered expectations in any way. I do realize that if you a situation where you try to distort the market based on emotional issues you will lose.
Based on your responses and your inability to address the core issues, it is clear you know that what I am saying is fundamentally right. You can complain about CEO salaries all you want but that is immaterial to our contract. Demagoguery wins loud applause, but the NMB would just laugh at you if you tried to use that as an economic argument. The guy losing the argument is the guy calling the other guy names.