Originally Posted by Timbo (Post 1728090)

You aren't going to win many games on just field goals.:rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Ferd149 (Post 1728308)

Is everyone who disagrees with you bucking for a management position? Serious question........that seems to be your usual comeback

Originally Posted by Oberon (Post 1728299)

My angle is rational thought. I enjoy fact based debate. "Restoration" seems like an irrational objective. Not because it is too high but because it's based on nothing a mediator is likely to consider during negotiations. It's a desperate argument in a situation that doesn't require it.

Here are some facts a mediator is likely to consider. Delta is making billions, seriously billions! Comparable pilot groups have comparable contracts. It'd be better if comparable pilot groups had better contracts but at least there is no US Airways out there making 40% less than us. Hell, the worst out there right now is probably Jet Blue and they just voted in ALPA because they aren't happy about it. Our company values labor peace to the point they talk about it to investors. We hold the keys to labor peace and if the company wants it they are going to have to pay for it.

These are all good things. Really good things. This is a really good environment to negotiate yet some here want our representatives to scream "restoration" and (figuratively) kick management in the nuts. Great idea. The minute you do that you lose any chance of monetizing labor peace over something a mediator likely doesn't care about. This doesn't make sense to me.

Originally Posted by Purple Drank (Post 1728473)

Not everyone. Just those who try to lower our expectations in this negotiating environment. Why would they do that? :confused:

I simply can't fathom any other explanation.

Originally Posted by Oberon (Post 1728299)

My angle is rational thought. I enjoy fact based debate. "Restoration" seems like an irrational objective. Not because it is too high but because it's based on nothing a mediator is likely to consider during negotiations. It's a desperate argument in a situation that doesn't require it.

Here are some facts a mediator is likely to consider. Delta is making billions, seriously billions! Comparable pilot groups have comparable contracts. It'd be better if comparable pilot groups had better contracts but at least there is no US Airways out there making 40% less than us. Hell, the worst out there right now is probably Jet Blue and they just voted in ALPA because they aren't happy about it. Our company values labor peace to the point they talk about it to investors. We hold the keys to labor peace and if the company wants it they are going to have to pay for it.

These are all good things. Really good things. This is a really good environment to negotiate yet some here want our representatives to scream "restoration" and (figuratively) kick management in the nuts. Great idea. The minute you do that you lose any chance of monetizing labor peace over something a mediator likely doesn't care about. This doesn't make sense to me.

Originally Posted by tsquare (Post 1728402)

Why is the points record holder for many teams is the kicker then?

Of course with the new rule in college football, I think it's stoopid to ever run one back from the endzone either...


discuss.. :)

Originally Posted by Purple Drank (Post 1728473)

Not everyone. Just those who try to lower our expectations in this negotiating environment. Why would they do that? :confused:

I simply can't fathom any other explanation.

Originally Posted by Oberon (Post 1728146)

Why do you attack me? I haven't attacked anyone.

Originally Posted by Oberon (Post 1728146)

You still haven't addressed the argument. You called me "foolish" and "stubborn" and cited two pretty clear examples of making economic decisions based on some past loss.

Originally Posted by Oberon (Post 1728146)

If history was erased and you had to make a decision on what the maximum we could possibly get in the next contract would it be the same number of whatever you define "restoration" as?

Originally Posted by Oberon (Post 1728146)

So the MEC said "restoration" in 2001 and the company gave in? The final contract didn't have anything to do with the economics of the times?

Originally Posted by Oberon (Post 1728299)

My angle is rational thought. I enjoy fact based debate.

Originally Posted by Oberon (Post 1728299)

"Restoration" seems like an irrational objective.

Originally Posted by Oberon (Post 1728299)

Not because it is too high but because it's based on nothing a mediator is likely to consider during negotiations.

Originally Posted by Oberon (Post 1728299)

It's a desperate argument in a situation that doesn't require it.

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler (Post 1728519)

Great. Look forward to it.



OK, you're certainly entitled to your opinion...but that's not fact based.



Restoration is not meant as a consideration for the NMB or any other mediator. It's a consideration for the members as our union leaders develop the strategies and tactics to produce a contract that leads the industry in every way. Restoration was one of the public strategies used by the 2001 MEC and it certainly worked. No reason we shouldn't do the same today. But our union refuses to even utter the word.



It's anything but desperate. It's demonstrably rational, understandable, fair and affordable by our wildly profitable company. Wildly profitable in large part to our concessions when they were desperately needed and our daily professional operational execution.

I'm very surprised you would characterize it as desperate. Couldn't be further from the truth in my opinion.

Carl