Carl,

I typically enjoy your posts, but you're losing me. You (correctly) were critical of the scourge letter from DALPA, but continue to bash those who disagree with you. You put out hyperbole like "secret police", throw out a couple remarks about something a friend told you regarding the psychological interview, and expect us to somehow magically come over to your way of thinking? We are all relatively intelligent, driven people. Putting down those whose ideas are different isn't a way to get them over to your side. Instead, it sort of seems sort of like the divide and conquer methods of management, don't you think?

But last time they ignored my list. Will Bill Lumberg return? Just curious what is left to give up/trade this time.

Can they just save money on polling and dust off the old survey? I doubt our "want list" has changed much. 1.2 BILLION with a B last quarter..........does it really matter what our "peers" are getting paid??

Is it true that our union leaders have to sign non-disclosure agreements because they get privilege to inside information about the company?

The question that follow yours is how much of that privileged information actually takes place? How often is X swapped for Y or X simply never materializes. Similar to what one of my LEC reps indicated what would happen if we voted yes, hasn't happened. I think all too often they manipulate the LEC reps to get that x% over 50%.

NewK,

Love the question, I'd like to know the motive behind it coming from the likes of Chuck Norris.

Ha. Nothing too deep. I think I'm just getting tired of surveys and polls. I feel stupid when I fill them out, because I really don't think my answer counts for much. I spent 30 minutes last time trying to figure out how much of a pay raise would be acceptable to me and they spent 2 months telling me about the time value of money. What's the point?

If these guys know more about the company than we do, I would prefer that they just tell us what they are going to ask for first. Then we can argue about it BEFORE the TA comes out. ;)

I bet that happens a lot.

No kidding.

I think a good place to start would be to get post-TA reviews of polling data. It's obviously a bad idea before, and during negotiations. But once, just once, I'd like to get a snapshot of where people actually stand.

It would instructive, when having discussions about where we should be, to understand where we actually were. Thing is, when speaking to various reps over the year, I got the vague sense that maybe the internet pilot community would be awfully surprised about what people ask for in private. Might make 88 Driver's brain explode, and his heart collapse. Or maybe not. Because it's all supposition, with no actual data.

Why wouldn't the preparations for C2015 include an honest review of 2012, with the membership?

Because the results of any negotiations on economic and job-protection issues (ie. money and scope) can lead to changes in the Company's stock performance, it is a requirement to sign NDA's that would prevent insider trading or other other potentially illegal scenarios.

On top of that, there are committee of the MEC that do receive confidential information from the company (routes, a/c orders, market projections) that the MEC uses to enforce applicable sections of the PWA.

I prefer having the Company's internal data plus less accurate external data to derive compliance and enforcement, wouldn't you?