I concur with MX.

It's not so much what is in the TA that we should be questioning and demanding better verbiage, but rather what is missing from it. This issue is nothing but a smoke screen.

We are in one of those times in our career that allows us an opportunity to fix the road we are on. To fix pot holes like accepted fares, Reserve transparency, utilization and minimum pay per day, deviation issues, pairing construction and disputes. To name a few.

Issues like 4A2B should be road closures! To have let this issue slip into obscurity and cover it up in just two short pages at the back of the book is shocking. Forget getting our money back, I have come to accept that reality. However, if the clause must stay we need some additional real protections from its abuse should the company "really" need it. Such as NO draft or volunteer and a monthly cap of 68/85 CH. If things get so bad that 4A2B needs to be invoked, these should not be bitter pills to swallow.

As for the money? I think we are going to lose the value of the 3% in QOL and system form changes once the combination of the FDAs and the NPRM kick in. I don't have a good number to seek to be quite honest. I think we will all benefit more from a better worded contract than we will by getting to keep the change off the sleep room floor.