Originally Posted by TED74

I was going to block your posts, but note I realize the pure comedic value they contain. Please don't stop!

You don't seem to understand that many of the NO voters aren't demanding MORE they are demanding LESS of the LESS. The "FOs you flew with" will figure it out in anyone else's "cockpit".

But continue...The more wackos we have defending this thing, the more rational thinkers will realize the answer to POS2015 is NO!

Originally Posted by SharpestTool

Actually there is something quite a bit better in this TA than C2012. Money. I get it that you think the non-money issues make this TA worse than the current contract. You have to admit that a substantial amount of money is in play that greatly surpasses C2012. In that sense, C2016 is superior. Right?

Originally Posted by SharpestTool

Actually there is something quite a bit better in this TA than C2012. Money. I get it that you think the non-money issues make this TA worse than the current contract. You have to admit that a substantial amount of money is in play that greatly surpasses C2012. In that sense, C2016 is superior. Right?

Originally Posted by Ferd149

i would be willing to relook without some of those issues. But, now that it's out of the MEC and out to the membership I think that ship has sailed.......

Do you agree it's too late? We MAY have had a chance to reengage if the MEC hadn't passed it. I still don't think the company would have wanted to show any union had that much power/influence.

Originally Posted by slowplay

C'mon, Man!

You said the NC got rolled and that you got slapped in the face. I showed you where to find you were incorrect.

Maybe it's time for some underboob or a pink panther gif.

Originally Posted by Denny Crane

I disagree. All things considered, the money does not "greatly surpass" C2012.

Denny

Originally Posted by SharpestTool

Ok. That wasn't so bad. So if I'm reading this right we will likely have to win this going through the NMB. Timeline probably undefined. That's the risk really I suppose. Do we get enough in a timeline that doesn't eat up any gains we achieve. I think we can all agree that beyond 18 months the numbers get real ugly. We will have to hope that the NMB agrees that our position is sound and management's position is unreasonable.

Short of that, we need to see capitulation from the company. We haven't seen capitulation from the others currently engaged with NMB. SWA really hurting right now from a TVM perspective.

Do SWA, UPS, and FedEx move if we shoot this down? Why would they? Could we join them waiting for someone to push the bar upward. On the other hand, if we ratify will their managements commit to the new standard? More importantly would the NMB now see our industry leading contract as the new reasonable position? If so, we could see those carriers break the NMB hold and advance. This would bode well of course for us 2.5 years down the road when we are back at it again.

Thoughts?

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

They're an Atlanta based law firm founded by Michael Campbell who was also a VP for us, retired, then came back to handle these negotiations for management. The firm specializes in breaking unions and industrial psychological ops. Many posters here who came from the regionals know all too well the tactics they use. Specifically, co-opting Union leaders and weakening the target Union from the inside.

Carl

Originally Posted by SharpestTool

Perhaps "greatly" is subjective. Let's say there is an additional 360 million per year into Delta pilots pockets and the pay rates are the highest in history. That is not subjective.