Originally Posted by Sink r8 (Post 1649351)

OK, which acronym should we forget first? I hate "SDP". CDO is right out.

Illegals works. So does "the heinous trips that shall never, ever be mentioned again"...

Originally Posted by forgot to bid (Post 1649542)

Tsquare and Carl have come togrther before. I have to go find the pic. May have had something to do with SWA. :D. BFF 4EVER

Shiz is a pilot here. On a few things we have differing views but on what matters most, Auburn football, we are on the same page. He is a hard worker and done more for pilots then I have BUT i have posted more pictures and gifs then he has. So I am content with that.

Originally Posted by LeineLodge (Post 1649567)

The numbers they were using at the meeting were somewhere around +$38M and +137 jobs from this TA as amended. We didn't get to see the math which was shown in closed session.

Originally Posted by Going2Baja (Post 1649664)

Redirecting - Anyone else hearing any DAL HAL Merger rumors? A couple birdies dropped me a call today and said it being talked about in ATL.

Baja.

Originally Posted by cstudent (Post 1649681)

It's not -Ferris? It's : Bueller? Bueller? Don't mangle movie quotes.
Here's your homework. Fill in the blanks.
It's ____miles to _____. We've got a full _____ of ____, a half a ______ of ______, it's _____ and we're wearing________.

Originally Posted by tsquare (Post 1649738)

Whoa... Back it up.. Wasn't CE saying that it was $40 million BEFORE the amendment? That means we would have been paying for the privilege of flying those God awful things???

Originally Posted by tsquare (Post 1649746)

Hit it..........

Originally Posted by LeineLodge (Post 1649616)

If there was a vote, it was in closed session (which was a majority of the morning.) Otherwise my best guess would be it was VERY obvious that the TA as originally proposed was not going to pass. I'm not sure any reps were supportive of the original TA, but that is just my speculation.

As I said, most of the morning was in closed session where they apparently directed the NC to re engage the company. To my knowledge there is no record of who actually "sent it back."

I'll echo Check in that I was very impressed with the level of preparation and diligence displayed by the reps. They asked great questions of the NC and were skeptical/critical of each section of the TA line-by-line.

To the few that are suggesting we should be concerned about C2015 as a result of this TA/meeting I would say it is the exact opposite. As a regular line guy I was very pleased to see the high level of efficiency/effectiveness on display at the meeting. To say I was surprised to see them eradicate the SDP in the matter of hours is an understatement.