Not quoting you, but this is ironic from one who more than likely spewed the line, "If we don't vote YES they'll go with plan B and leave us behind.":D

You must be confused. My understanding is Johnso voted NO.

Btw- I also know him personally and have always appreciated his matter-of-fact demeanor.

You guys slinging mud at him have the wrong target. Fwiw I'm within 50ish number of him on the list and we don't always see eye to eye.

I'm not confused. He's mocking pilots who believe that when management says something they should actually be speaking from a position of truth, not with an intention to deceive to drive them toward a desired end point. You would think someone so "matter of fact" would hold integrity and honesty at a higher level than deceitfulness to achieve the desired ends of those he answers to. His defense of SD's statement is pathetic.

There were times between TA & contract that I considered voting YES. This was one of the reasons. But after a lot of thought, I decided I was spending too much time searching for a reason to vote YES. You may not believe me, but I did vote NO. It's ok if you don't believe that I did vote NO. I won't take offense. :)

I'm not defending SD's statements, & I'm not mocking anyone. I do find it amusing that people took a conditional statement as fact. The words "may begin hiring as early as 2012" is not a lie. It's also not a guarantee. Why are people acting as if it was so deceitful? After all we as pilots have seen(especially in BK), are we really putting huge faith in any lip service they give us? They always say "Watch their feet", right?

Do you feel someone should let SD's statement effect their vote? It certainly didn't effect mine. We've seen the stick and carrot too many times.

I believe you when you say you voted no, but your defense of SD's written statement is what I find troubling. I accused you of being one who could have been heard to use the tactic of pushing pilots to vote yes because who knows what the evil plan "B" might be that would leave us behind. If you voted No then you probably didn't use that argument. Forgive me for making that inference. However, you should easily see how one could associate the two when you defend this man's deceitful statement. I've never met SD, and I wouldn't recognize him if I saw him. But I get his emails every week or so, and I'd hope he would be the first to apologize for making such a duplicitous implication to sway pilots to vote yes on the TA. If not, I'd think less of him than I already do for that slimy, dishonest, under-handed tactic.

Jack,

I'm an optimistic person. Maybe that will change with time. IDK. Sometimes the pessimism on this thread consumes me, & my natural defense is to debate the pessimism with the glass is half full approach. I don't believe that this TA will have the negative effect you think it will. In 2-3 years, we should know which one of us is correct.

Whether you believe it or not, I voted AGAINST the TA. But that is really irrellevant, because 62% of our pilot group disagreed with me and the TA is now our contract. Will complaining about it on this thread change that? No. It's over, & we need to move on.

Would you have me call someone whose vote was affected a sucker? Because I won't say it did or didn't. What I will say is why did he say such a thing at the time he wrote it? The man is not an idiot. He wrote that with the intention of swaying the vote, because he obviously believes we do have enough suckers in our group to fall for such a statement. His hope was that out of desperation, the junior pilots who are suffering the most from the greatest stagnation seen by any of us in a long time would buy off on it. That he'd get at least some percentage to take it into consideration in weighing all the factors when they cast their vote. So whether it had an effect or not, is not the point. The point is that in writing what he did to our group he showed a bit of his inner self. Judge from that what you will.

Thanks 80kts. You know I'm too lazy for anything above line grunt. :D

Yup, we know each other. I also know hockeypilot44 and I have nothing against each other. We just don't see the same picture beyond the horizon.

Thanks Sink r8. Your calm demeanor is always appreciated.

Thanks Leine. I did vote NO. I wasn't comfortable with a YES. Others were. No hard feelings. I'm just glad they voted. Life goes on. :)

I didn't ask you to call them suckers. I asked if you felt they should have allowed their vote to be swayed by his statement. Let's be honest, SD did not have to mention the possibility of hiring. I never have, nor will defend his statement. He(they) may have been attempting to sway voters. But is this not the typical political games we play? How many times will we let Lucy yank the ball mid kick before we stop attempting the kick? So either we base our vote on the TA alone, or we continue to fall prey to politics. At some point, the blame lies on us too.