Its like they don't think anyone out there will ever notice that the LCC collective with many many many hundreds of growth airframes on order are licking their chops with nationwide route maps they are counting on poaching from the legacies like its 2002 all over again. They are out gunned and out matched, but their ace in the hole is them betting we will cull capacity forever and gift it to them as they keep taking orders to facilitate their growth. Then when they are big enough maybe we will code share with them because they're so big. On the bright side at least we are rapidly collecting underpants on the way to mad profit.

Old Contract: (max 70 or 76 seat jets, 255)
http://i938.photobucket.com/albums/a...d/TEMP1-42.png

New Contract: (max 70 or 76 seat jets, 325)
http://i938.photobucket.com/albums/a...d/temp2-35.png

What's the difference between a 76 and 70 seats? 6 seats.

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/i...T6vD2tZFKlxw0A

Ah, picture of a large RJ was too large.

Sailing,

I won't call you a liar, but I have to ask how you definitively know that management approached the negotiators for relief on 190's to be flown at DCI?

More complete and total BS. The number of pilots on this forum that stated what you claim they did was very small. The vast majority here were insistent on ensuring nothing larger than 76 seats. Yet you claim "almost every pilot on this forum...". Do you even know the difference between the truth and lie anymore?

Carl

The only way they could have gotten to 255 jumbo RJ's under the old contract was to grow mainline by a lot. This new contract gets them 70 additional jumbo RJ's without growing mainline. You know this, yet you spin the BS line anyway. Why do you do that sailingfun? Are you that desperate to repair your reputation from when you worked so hard for DALPA's FUD (Fear Uncertainty Doubt) campaign? I'm going to start calling you sailingFUD so that you don't forget your past.

Carl

This is just such a beautiful post.

I spoke at length with one of the negotiators. Just to set the record straight they did not ask specifically for the E190. They asked for more seats and weight that clearly was geared to that aircraft. They offered higher pay rates in exchange. I think if some here took the time to ever engage one of the negotiators about the process and what was traded back and forth they might have a somewhat different opinion of the results. Negotiations are always a give and take. Negotiations under the RLA give management a huge advantage. One thing I really find a odd comment form junior pilots is that they cite how well the company is doing as something that is wrong. Yet the fact the company is doing well will benefit them far more then the senior pilots over time. Time to take a long break from the giant pity party that has become this forum. I check back in 3 years from now and we will see who's version of the future was more correct.

The process was subverted.

We traded concessions (with some improvements) for COLA and large RJs.

Mgmt has an especially huge advantage when our MEC is working for them. How 'bout that strike preparedness committee - never spooled because it was never intended to be used. "Fleeting opportunities" and all.

The only upside I see is a 3 year duration and the (non-guaranteed) possibility of patterning up on Unical and USAA (since our JV partners and other pilots aren't in our competitive set).

Glad to see you're setting the record straight...against your own posts sailingfud. Maybe if your first thought wasn't to lie and distort, you wouldn't have to correct the record so often.

Carl