Originally Posted by
Carl Spackler
"Cost neutral" is my extremely accurate distillation of your thought process in negotiations. It is proven by the many statements you make like this one:
That's good. You're careful to never make a statement like this until you're confronted as being a management stooge.
Nobody has said or inferred anything to the contrary.
We of course never asked for unlimited pay, thus never struck for unlimited pay.
This is the heart of your problem and why you really are a cost neutral guy in your core...you just have to deny it once confronted. Nobody disagrees that there are limits. Nobody has EVER said they want unlimited anything. Thus there is no need for trade offs within our contract unless you are a cost neutral kind of guy. There is only a need to decide what you are willing to fight for, then properly confront management with it...and laugh at them when they say: "What are you willing to trade off for it?"
Can't you come up with your own stuff instead of copying mine?
Carl
Carl, it's really tough for you to admit you are wrong. So I say that GAINS in reserve will impact GAINS in other parts of the contract you come up with COST NEUTRAL. Show me how that math works.
You say there is no need for tradeoffs. Okay, I want 365 days of vacation and triple my pay. No tradeoffs, I want you to show up at the next MEC Meeting and tell the MEC how you are going to do that. What, are you a management stooge, a shill, can't you do that for me, because you claim there are no tradeoffs. Live up to your own words and deliver for me Carl.