Ignorance is bliss ...

deleted.........

Viewed another way, he continued to make the same noises he's been making to the analysts. He's already talked about about being "creative" as you pointed out at the last quaterly call, WRT 50-seaters, but hasn't announced specifics. So nothing new there either. If there were any 717's, and they were a follow-on piece to a deal with us (for example, rates must be confirmed through a vote), then he wouldn't have announced it this way either.

The only thing he's done to tip his hand, sort of, is to suggest this deal is designed to reduce 50-seaters. He's not obligated to discuss all it's designed to do.

You're working the tea-lives alittle hard on this one. We all want to know what's going on, so it's normal to connect dots, but I don't think you've got enough info to arrive at a credible picture. I don't blame you for trying: I'm doing the same. My brain's still churning on the SW deferrals.

Allow me to re-phrase then ... .

Management is making ALPA's sales job difficult. Today was a tactical blunder. The leaks, which seem to correspond with management's forward looking statements, suggest that leadership is more than a little tone deaf. It is a common fault of autocratic regimes.

OK, I agree. Management is getting ahead of themselves selling to the street the notion that they "have an agreement" with us. That's for sure. It's insulting, and counter-productive.

I don't know if there are still interractions between the company and NC while the MEC deliberates, but it wouldn't surprise me. This isn't a round-about way to suggest I know something, I haven't even heard a hint this might be going on. I just suspect that it could happen. If it did, then the company has given a little bit of leverage to us, as you said earlier today.

As for the leaks, the thing I find most interesting is how they're mostly negative. The rumored deal per JL's newsletter, for example, doesn't seem like it would have legs. What's weird is the things NOT mentioned. For example, what about vacation, trip rigs, etc.? What about the rest of Section 1?

You said you thought management is leaking this stuff, and I don't see how/why. It doesn't serve their purpose. It doesn't serve the union's purpose to enrage the pilot group over the semi-ugly, and the bad, without revealing the good. I think the union wants to produce something they can present to us. And I have to conclude that the NC didn't suffer from a brain hemorrage. Ergo, the deal meets the MEC's requirements, and our own surveys.

It's got to be a political play by some group of people, but not the company or union as a whole.

Trying not to impatient here but, does anyone else think the longer the MEC deliberates, the higher the chance of them voting it down? Sorta like a jury, usually longer deliberations mean Not Guilty.

Policy manual says seven days. Chill out.

They have 7 days. There are many "subject matter experts" coming and going and a whole ton of un-used MCF money to blow on booze and hookers (just kidding about the last part). While the MEC can short cut the 7 days, there is an unbelievable amount of work to do. Taking the full seven days is what I expect.

The men on the Negotiating Committee are really good guys and respectful of the process, as is Tim O'Malley. If (and I think we can assume the affirmative) every thing has gone correctly, the passage of the TA by the MEC is ministerial. However a lot of important education is going on so these folks can teach us the intricacies of the contract offer over the next few weeks.

Expert ALPA to be in full sales mode though. With most TA's comes the union's consent to push for membership ratification. Occasionally a MEC will send out a TA without a recommendation. But, that would be unique given the situation with this one.

Or perhaps they are still in contact with the company, "tweaking". Sort of like the jury going back to the judge to read back testimony and asking for clarifications of the law. But I agree, confidence isn't increasing.

I don't know if we can make a comparison to jury deliberations even though it seems similiar. If anything, the trial just started. And I dont think if we all teamed up here and ore it apart looking for all of the hidden gems like whether the PBS Staffing Formula divides by 60 or 70 could be done very quickly.

I optimistically want to say even if this contract is 100% scope and C2K plus inflation, they're looking for the catch.

I hope.