All very true, but yet not a peep of criticism about the company's method of wooing some yes votes out of people with this ploy? You're right, it did have a lot of outs for SD to back away from it (heck, he doesn't even have to do that; it's just never mentioned again). So forgive me if I didn't buy the other propaganda being thrown my way about the TA like it creating a need for pilots, how scope was improved, etc., etc., etc.

That statement was filled with a bunch qualifiers. Whomever took that to mean definite hiring needs to buy some beachfront property in AZ.

I don't think anyone took it to be definite due to the qualifiers... however it was certainly a very low way of trying to get votes for the TA.

Shack. It certainly didn't add to SD's credibility, and it's a helluva long way from "good faith".

I second that. it was just odd that management would join in the sales job given what a great deal they'd gotten if we had said no. What was it? Guaranteed five years without a raise?

Honestly some may have. By the time we are back to the table like this, many will have forgotten all about it. It servd a purpose.

Apollo 11 Gendec:



Cheers
George

That would be most of the MEC and 63% of the pilots and Bill Lumberg. PT Barnum was an advisor for management.

Any RAW gurus know much a week of vacation will bump up your RAW score?

18 RAW for 1 week or vacation
4 additional days off for 1 "week of vacation" (16 vs 12)

Woohoo!

Cheers
George