Spot on Ten. Life is filled with reasons not to take risk. Our jobs require us to manage risk. Management thinks that means we're risk averse and malleable through fear. We'll either prove them right, or wrong.

Carl

The prevailing argument on this thread is you have to say "restoration" then just wait until the company gives it to you. That won't work. The company doesn't care that you used to make more money than you do now, the public doesn't care, the mediator doesn't care. The pilot group is the only entity who cares.

I'm interested in identifying areas of leverage and figuring out what they might be worth. I want the most we can possibly get from C2015. If that number equals "restoration", that's great too. I'm not interested get your way. I'm just telling you you are heading in the wrong direction.

I'm not sure how Ebola affects Delta or why Richard Anderson would want to furlough and pay us less because of it.

As you well know, that's a complete distortion of the prevailing argument. You do that quite often. I have to ask myself why. The clear answer is that you cannot possibly refute the argument, so you distort it. You know it's the one clear proven objective that will work, and since you're very afraid that it will work, you continuously distort the very meaning of the objective. You're so disingenuous in this regard that it's almost a waste of time responding to you.

You can only speak for Oberon. Nobody else.

No you're not Oberon. You're only interested in minimizing pilot costs to Delta. That's abundantly clear. You're "advice" to the contrary is because you know it would work.

Carl

You think something different?

You have to prove what is "reasonable" to get the opportunity to strike. "Restoration or strike" is not a reasonable argument. You haven't shown how to get to 38% so I can only assume "restoration" is your only argument.

You don't think striking is on the forefront of everyone's mind? For our union to talk about striking before the openers have even been exchanged is telegraphing the NMB that we aren't interested in negotiating. When the NMB determines you aren't interested in negotiating you achieve nothing.

Illegal job action? Are you serious? Are you just ignoring recent history or do you think getting sued and losing somehow helps negotiations?

Yes. But I can't speak for "the public" anymore than you can.

Which is exactly why I discussed the errors in reasonability made by APA.

Again...they are not arguments. Restoration is an objective and strikes are a tactic. When you don't pay attention, we talk past each other.

See above.

I'm not proposing talking about striking prior to opener exchange. I'm talking about preparing the pilots and their families for that possibility. Big difference.

Carl

Back up your assertions. Provide an example of anything you are saying. I've accused you of making stuff up and flat out lying and used quotes to make my argument. You certainly can do the same.

What I've written is my opinion. You disagree? Tell me why.

That doesn't even make sense. Why would I be interested in minimizing pilot costs? I have to live with whatever we negotiate a lot longer than you do.

Again, you're the only one talking about illegal job actions Oberon. Why do you bait people with things only you are saying? It's why you look weak and fearful. Debate openly and factually. Leave the straw men at home. Or continue to watch your credibility plummet.

Gotta go now Oberon. You have the floor.

Carl

I'm not speaking for anyone, I'm giving my opinion. You can do the same. In your opinion, do you think the public will have sympathy for airline pilots who want to be "restored"?

Which is exactly why I discussed the errors in reasonability made by APA.

Okay. What other tactics can be used to get to 38%?

The condescension is unnecessary. You're an intellectual guy, you don't need to go there to argue.



How does one prepare pilots and their families for the possibility of a strike without talking about it?

I don't see any circumstances where we would be released within two years of the exchange of openers. It will be pretty evident early on if the company is trying to run out the clock. Lets say our union starts family strike prep six months in; is 18 months enough time to prepare pilots and families? I think it is.

I think you lose credibility if you start talking about striking this early.

When you get back maybe you can reflect on who is doing the baiting. You said our leverage is something that can't be discussed here. I asked you if it was an illegal job action. You accused me of baiting.

If you aren't talking about an illegal job action will you give us a clue what you are talking about? Maybe I'm way off base but illegal job actions are the only thing I can think of that some think would give us leverage that couldn't be discussed here.

Have a good weekend...what's left of it.