Haha. No conspiracy of course. But timing does matter. The original post is simply to remind pilots not to be alarmed. Ok so instead of 1.8 Billion in operating income this quarter it ended up being 1.7 Billion, for example. Ok yea the company will take a hit. But whatever they report will still be very impressive and not cause to vote yes in some sort of knee jerk panic reaction.

Apply same logic above to RA's latest message in the weekly email. To sum it up, he loves the amicable relationship with pilots but if we vote no, we're dead to him. I guess the honeymoon's over.

Battled-hardened is fine.
I'll stipulate to the fact we're a very healthy company, needing no concessions, that can afford to do better.
And I agree that this needs to be focused on the facts.

We don't really know what the future holds. Some of recent trends are positive, some aren't. The farther out we try to forecast, the more inaccurate we get.

None of which changes the fact that this TA is early, and the normal timeline takes us almost three years from now.

Is that fair?

Btw it is very common for them to do an investor update after releasing June traffic numbers.

Sure. The predictability is less certain the further out in the future. This pay is not significant enough a price for the concessions. This is our opportunity, it may take time. A normal amount of section 6 time. We are early.

The future holds a well executed 3-5 year business plan, The further future has a 5+ year plan. Given the track record of this management there will be success. If you are referring to a catastrophic event, lets cross that bridge when we come to it. The profit sharing is an excellent shock absorber in that case if the company fails to make a profit.

Now thay are pulling pro-con letters out of our V files.

I think more accurately, they are pulling con letters and dissenting opinions.

This is being treating like a no time emergency when we are 6 months early. We are skipping checklists and flying single pilot to a 10 mile final. This is a situation where we need to make some time by voting it down and then expand the team.

Whenever I would get hasty about a purchase my dad would always say "there is no such thing as the last of the good deals". This was pretty common sense simple advice.

I do believe the union has a right to put that material in the v files. Do you have proof of this?

The story as I understand it is the NYC LEC rep at his own expense placed his con letter in every v-file in JFK. (I don't know about LGA). J Van Sickle, executive assistant to MD is alleged to have call JFK ops and requested the Company remove the letter from the v-files.

I wasn't there. I can't confirm any of this. But, that's my understanding of the story.

What I wonder about is why would the Company do what a DAPLA executive assistant requested? My guess is we may be missing a detail or two.

Standing by for incoming.

^^^This is brilliant^^^