I think we're going overboard with the 4, 8, 3 and 3.

At this point lettuce wait and sea what comes out.

Speaking of sea, time for failboat:

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/...jpg?1318992465

http://www.inquisitr.com/wp-content/row-fail-boat.jpg

http://www.failfunnies.com/24/images...h-failboat.jpg

Look closely, there is a guy on board...

I think the numbers are for a 3 year deal. 4 percent now and 8 on the amendable date then 2 more raises over 3 years. This is about how much money I figured the company would spend to get a quick contract. More then that makes no sense. They would be much better off from a management standpoint to let the contract go to a traditional section 6. I have emailed my rep that if this is the deal then I would like to see a no vote at the MEC level. It should not get to member ratification.

Thanks for your leadership on this sailing.

Remember, keep your expectations high. You don't want 6, 9, 3 and 3 to all of a sudden look good.

In the meantime, more failboat:

http://www.failfunnies.com/34/images...-boat-fail.jpg

http://www.boatdesign.net/gallery/da...-name-fail.jpg

http://jesshaines.com/blog/wp-conten...s-Arrived1.jpg

TRIPLE those numbers = epic fail and a colossal kick in the junk.

Time to run the "hardball" checklist

- Start the clock/calendar (you're welcome tsquare) on the "real" Section 6.
- Preflight the inflatable rat.
- Order picket signs
- Get Bob in the on-deck circle
- And fire the current buffoons immediately.

No kidding. Looks like Finis has some reading comprehension problems. Ready, fire, aim!

Scambo,

I'm thinking along the same lines, assuming the rumors are true, and the contract doesn't make up for low payrates in other areas, but the problem might be similar to the AT 2 T/A's situation. Guys will be livid that they didn't get to vote if the economy tanks, and they will be livid if we get nowhere in the traditional track, at which point we'll start tearing ourselves apart, and guys will be livid anyway.

The place where these kinds of things have to stop is the negotiating table. Negotiators have to be willing to walk way. Thing is, if they're delivering what the MEC gave them for a bottom line, they shouldn't walk away. And if the MEC is telling the negotiators that what we want is what we said we wanted in the survey. At which point, we have only ourselves to blame, but since we don't like to blame ourselves, we'll say we were compelled to fill out hopelessly low numbers in our private surveys, I suppose.

Either way, the rumored 4/8/3/3 is either clearly unsat vis-a-vis the survey, or our actual private expectations are completely below the stated expectations we usually announce publicly on APC and the ALPA forum. Sort of a stated income problem, and we all know how well that worked out for the housing market.

For the record, I didn't think payrates in and of themselves make a contract, but I thought 18/5/5/5 was reasonable.

Might want to read the rest of Sailing's post.

Don't see the sense in getting all wrapped around the axle over rumors and conjecture at this point. We'll see this TA in a few days, might as well save our energy until then

Good news is they relaxed the uniform standards...

http://www.humorsharing.com/media/im...c3d95b40a8.jpg