Since you put it that way, it appears you forgot to say in his apparently well reasoned and informed opinion.

Your right I did. The motivation for DAL to move now, is large RJ's and debt reduction. We pass on this and decide to go back it will be 2014 or beyond before the RJ issue is not one that will be their quickest course to an agreement or debt reduction.

The God for honest truth is most pilots here are not willing to wait for FLAP's, they want their money. A No vote in the majority will mean more pay and maybe more protections in 1, but the large RJ bump will remain. I understand that and am still voting do re-engage. Why? Because I want better protections and a process to take this bump in large RJ's down over the next 10-15 years. I want limits on aircraft numbers and extension durations, I want current CPA's to no be renewed. I also want broader JV language, better non compliance language with the ratios, I want a check valve on the ratios, I want a domestic alliance carrier clause outside of the JV language(covers more than just RJET but putting it in there before they do it is wise as well), I want HND added to the 315 weekly slot language for NRT(loss of leverage and force majure if the business plan or market viability changes, and I want to see better any beyond language for a replacement type for the 717. That section 1.

The rest of the agreement has to fix pay, reroute, reserve rotation pay to equal line holders, better CDA(6 int'l and 5 dom min) reserve rotation guarantee, codify the commuting policy, LV+7.5 not 15 or make it voluntary, Work rules are gradual implemented based on number of retirements, sick policy deletes DAL or their designee requesting medical documents unless you go to LTD; language does not need to be codified, holiday pay, more DC, stock grants immediately vested, better codification of non-rev policy, bow wave if MLB block goes 10% below two year rolling avg, and five PTO days added to the APD function; to name a few.

All of these are reasons I am willing to send it back. Little tweaks make this a much better agreement.

That right there is my opinion. Pay is still one, scope is two. Look at this board and all of the supposed Scope Warriors. Many agree that more RJ's are fine and are voting yes to this TA for more money, you really think that you can get this group to stand the ground? Its all in the psyche profile that was hired and is the majority here.

I love these games, we just don't do it enough. :D

Its a metaphor for 717s, with the sun played by FL 717s and the TA played by the dude and the water can by jumbo RJs. :D

There will be a widebody RFP in the 3rd quarter, also some interest in another carriers 777-300's.

Shhhhhh! That's too much of a carrot. People can't handle that.

We're going to outsource WB's?!? :eek::D

I wouldn't be so sure about that. We all want to believe that the company will sweeten the pot if we just vote no. But the reality is they spent a lot of time and resources defeating every other major union on the property. To merely capitulate to us because we vote no and then give us more would be huge ammunition to the other employee groups to reunionize. After all, look what happened to the pilots? They got more by beating the company. This is in no way a declaration to change somebody's well thought out No vote. I just don't believe RA, EB and boys are going to say "Yeah you're right boys, we just wanted to see what you would do. Here are the improvements you really want." I think there is a lot more at stake if they should give us something better. Not saying they won't. Just saying don't count on it.

RFP=Request For Proposals. As in, hey BA, hey Airbus, make us an offer.

I know! I know! I was just kidding. Hence the :D

But on the other hand, we've never said no to them before. That has ramifications to how big of an initial "Best Deal" we were given. I think DAL Pilots saying no would send some shock waves.

Not gonna happen though. We'll vote this puppy in.