This can't be a serious post. 99 times out of 100 it is the pilots that want to complete negotiations for a new CBA and it is the company who would rather delay a CBA. That is why negotiations take 3-4-5 years. Pilots normally have close to zero leverage in negotiations, especially to get something from the company that the company doesn't want to give, or give up.

Sure. Bad idea, but sure. Vote your how you feel. Lose 70/30 and stay you tried.... will be just like the contract vote.

I was just using the logic you gave. You say we can vote no then but we can't now. What's different? How will we have more leverage?

1. I think this vote is going to be a LOT closer than the contract vote.

2. Why not try to get more restrictions and guarantees IN the TA? Why not try and get more value for the pilots IN the TA?

totally serious. Talked with the union at length about this.

why cant we just say no in 5years and 24 months?

I'm not sure how the vote will go. Clearly, I'm voting yes like the CBA vote and you are voting NO like the CBA vote. I think it will be similar to the CBA.

Ask the NC. I did not negotiate this and I can't answer this question. Call the NC chair or do a PDR and have him call you.

It’s very similar to voting yes to the CBA because of the industry leading scope section and then voting yes to this TA which guts the scope section. What changed?

{sarcasm intended}

that's actually a decent argument. And while the scope section is changing in the LOA (should it pass) it is still robust. Hell, this section 1 is still 1000% more robust than AA has, even assuming this passes. And we can still say no *but down the road*.

The world is not ending.

Well, I voted yes to the CBA, so you might want to reevaluate ALL of your assumptions.

very sorry. thought you were publicly a no voter.