Very nicely done!! And totally consistent with going from being staffed 15.6% to 8.3% over the min required.

You need to read the forum, nobody ever said such a thing. What they were saying is we're decreasing how many pilots we would need. What we were told was that was wrong, we'd start hiring in... 2012.

Memory lane... November 2010...

What % over the min until the whole thing breaks?

http://www.best-gif.com/wp-content/u...h-your-ass.gif

I mean what if BH/ pilit increases another 3% in less than two years?

He is wanting to go ZRH-JFK, but needs to get up to Newport, or PVD, after JFK. I told him it would be easier to fly into ATL and then fly up to PVD, both on Delta mainline. Is there an easy way to get from NYC (LGA or JFK) up to Newport or PVD?

6% I have been told.

You really sure you want to take that sort of trip down memory lane?

While there were some on APC that couldn't help themselves predict the end of the world, I think the biggest, and longest lasting controversy, had to do with some fairly rosy predictions of hiring, and whether a little wool had been pulled over our eyes regarding hiring in 2012. Lots and lots of back-pedaling on that score.

I don't see the point in being condescending, and calling out certain individuals, unless you and sailing actually enjoy the conflict.

Never mind, slowplay and sailing. I forgot the date. I see where you two are going with this. Nice!

All we need is Carl talking about the zombie alter-ego union, and someone using the term "alpoid", or "apologist", and the cast is complete for a little April's Fool time-warp.

[unenthusiastic rescue divers doing two out of three on "rock/paper/scissors"]: "I'm not rescuing that."

Regardless of what metrics we use, I think we all can agree we are currently doing more flying with fewer pilots as opposed to 2 years ago. To not acknowledge that C2012 at least played a part in that is naïve imo.

Condescending? How about factual. How about learning from history rather than being driven by it?

Line up the union comm from C2012. Then compare the posts of FtB, PurpleDrunk, the Manager, Scambo etc. See what was more accurate. Also, compare the comm from the various councils during the time frame.

Then compare your W-2 from 12/12 to 12/13, realizing that 12/12 had 6 months of C2012 increases in the pay.

It won't look very much like the 4833 talking point. It won't look very much like the charts and graphs from amateur analysts throughout the ratification window.

Why is it important? Call it a historical accuracy check. While past performance isn't a guarantor of future results, these folks called into question the credibility of "official" comm that you were getting. They wanted to influence your vote. That vote directly effects your wallet.

Oh, and remember that none of the carriers that came after us were able to get even as much as we got. It's still not enough, but the negateers wanted you to say "no" with no plan or methodology to do better

So yes, I think the trip is important. We're coming up on contract negotiations in a year. We've got a new NC. We've got a significantly different MEC and administration. And the relationships with management, ownership, finance and other stakeholders that got us paid first and more relies on our credibility and ability to execute as a business partner.

If we want to lead the industry, we as pilots and our bargaining agent have to be relevant. Otherwise we'll be part of the labor pack and move in concert with them. We're coming to a crossroads.

So no, it's not about being condescending or creating personal conflict. It's about how we go forward.