I didn't see anyone slamming Sam for his opinions. I did read that Sam found himself unable to contribute because he marginalized himself among the other reps. (One man's opinion.) I've seen quite a few one-term reps who get elected with a great campaign and then become so integrated with that identity that they cannot compromise with the majority.

My opinion is that a great rep can't be an island. If you want to contribute, then move the majority towards your viewpoint with diplomacy. Use small victories. Incrementalism, if you will. That serves your constituency. Planting your flag on one issue/viewpoint/hill results in irrelevance and wastes your election. View the bodies of all the one term reps who served and left dejected and bitter. (That last bit was not about Sam, but at a couple of other buddies/acquaintances who left the MEC bloody with self-inflicted wounds.)

I think the thought opening the cowling on the 90 is what upsets them.

The reason, or my guess, is maybe the flying they want out of atl and DTW doesn't leave a lot of airplanes for two other hubs.

In your scenario, we go into negotiations with demands while telling the other side that there is nothing they want that we will listen to. We reach an impasse. The NMB is then going to decide who is negotiating in bad faith. Which party here is negotiating in bad faith? Since I know you will give some silly answer, the real question for EVERYONE ELSE that actually thinks about this, from an objective point of view, who is negotiating in bad faith here? What will happen next?

Oh, by the way, this is exactly the path that the American pilots followed to get parked. For years. And USAPA. We could go on and on, by why should we learn from history when we can make the same stupid mistakes over and over and over and over.

Outstanding shot of the ATL B food court! But they're not wearing their hats!:eek:

I was hoping to have a discussion on this most important of topics without the snarkiness and baiting of people to respond in kind. So I'll ignore the snark.

We would never go into negotiations saying there's "nothing they want that we will listen to." Concessions with no gains are accepted by us when our company is in trouble. Gains without concessions used to be the norm when our companies were strong. Now we're in this new paradigm where every gain has to somehow be cost accounted by a concession in other areas. If now isn't the time to be demanding a no concession contract, then that time will never exist again. This doesn't mean we don't listen and accept change that can be good for the airline operation, as that's perfectly acceptable in negotiations. What we shouldn't accept in this environment is concessionary change when we're the only employee group at Delta that is not back to their pre-bankruptcy wages, and our company is stronger than its ever been.


Alfa, that's not the path American pilots followed to get parked and you know it. I'm certain that you know it. The path American took was to open every section of their contract demanding a restoration on day 1. This included immediate pay raises back to pre 9/11 levels and all their other work rules returned at a time when everyone else was in bankruptcy. In the end, the NMB stated that the open issues were far too numerous for the NMB to narrow, and that one side (American pilots) were asking for financial gains that would bankrupt AMR. So they got parked. That's the path American pilots followed and the environment in which they followed it Alfa.

Carl

Well by all means, you have a much much better solution. Let's just tell the company to pay us C2K + inflation +25% or go **** themselves, and just sit back and let the checks start rolling in. With YOUR attitude, we'll have NO agreement, and will live under the contract that you think sucks so bad for years to come. How fun that will be. And since only idiots believe that history won't repeat itself, I invite you to review how well the APA did with the strategy you believe will be so successful.

Months... years... won't bother me. It's the young/junior that will suffer the most when all is said and done.

Have a nice day "flamer"

That is the stupidest thing I have ever read on this forum.

I'd like to stay away from the name calling and emotional outbursts if possible Sink.

He probably does have a better sense of the pilot group than I do. I'm still trying to determine it accurately.

Oh but there is something to do and it has to be started now. That something is preparing our families for a pay interruption by saving for it. If a strike were decided as necessary by this pilot group, that is far too late to begin family financial planning. As such, the strike would be seen by management as an empty gesture. If you don't begin the family financial preparations at least two years prior, you're essentially eliminating a strike as an option.

Having been through this a bunch Sink, I can assure you that waiting for legitimate stonewalling is far too late and your group will not be moving in lock step. Many people will be phoning in saying: "I'm behind this effort, but I can't miss a pay check...I've got no savings."

Use of the ultimate weapon must be prepared for use or it's useless.

Carl

Apparently you don't read your own posts.