Originally Posted by TheMitigator

Haha, every single assumption you've made about me has been completely wrong.

What is it with you guys where you want to make all kinds of assumptions about people you disagree with? I guess you feel you can ignore the facts that are being shoved in your face and tell yourself "well yeah, but they haven't seen what I've seen. They're just a dumb kid with no industry experience.". You're focusing on the person (incorrectly might I add) instead of the argument, because, well, you can't confront the argument. Im not going to say that you are dumb, but your response defintiely is.

Originally Posted by TheMitigator

Im relatively new and have been waiting to see this TA to decide whether to leave or not. If it passes im gone. OTZ may be right about the vote but is absolutely wrong about attrition just like the 3 other mergers which didn’t happen so no surprise there.

1st year pay is a joke, snap up is useless, etc etc.

Originally Posted by Andy

you're likely some kid

Originally Posted by Andy

All one needs to do is look at your post history and draw the same conclusions as what I wrote.
Here's your second post on APC, in the Alaska subforum dated 9/28/22:


Your first five posts on APC were in the Alaska subforum. You started posting in the United subforum on 9/19/23.

But sure, I'm completely wrong about you. So are you not telling the truth now, or were you not telling the truth on all of your Alaska subforum posts last year?

Originally Posted by TheMitigator

Again you're choosing to focus on the person and not the argument because you are unable to produce anything but unjustified, sensationalized, incorrect, irrelevant personal attacks.

Originally Posted by Spartacusbob

Ad hominem attacks to justify your position means your position lacks the evidence to support it any other way, that or you’re just a bad person.

Originally Posted by Andy

To repeat again. This TA has the most QOL improvements since I have been hired at United more than 20 years ago. But that's not good enough for you and some others here.

It is humorous how my response to your failure to answer what your background experience is would be considered a personal attack. And you still come back with a veiled response as to your wisdom in this matter.

Tell ya what ... how about you or anyone else post which previous United contract in the last 25 years had better QOL improvements. You and a few others here seek perfect. Perfect is never going to happen.

Originally Posted by TheMitigator

…so you were making a joke where you were the punchline? Good one.

What you still can’t seem to grasp after all that has taken place is that you voted in a sub par contract because that’s all the NC could get WITHOUT A NO VOTE! If it was voted down (like united) then the Delta rates would have come out a few weeks later and the NC could have likely gotten you much more (like United did). You cant see that just by looking at what your peers have done but I’m the one without brains. Riiiiiiight. Or maybe you can clearly see that you sold yourself short and you are desperately trying to justify your shortsighted, impulsive, fear-based decision which history has proven to be wrong.

You don’t know anything about me, where I’ve been and what I’ve done. Im just trying to provide some insight to help this pilot group. Not sure why you’re even here if you don’t work for UAL.

Originally Posted by Andy

To repeat again. This TA has the most QOL improvements since I have been hired at United more than 20 years ago. But that's not good enough for you and some others here.

It is humorous how my response to your failure to answer what your background experience is would be considered a personal attack. And you still come back with a veiled response as to your wisdom in this matter.

Tell ya what ... how about you or anyone else post which previous United contract in the last 25 years had better QOL improvements. You and a few others here seek perfect. Perfect is never going to happen.

Originally Posted by Spartacusbob

Imma try something.

Though I disagree with your position on the contract, I respect your position, it is logical and reasonable. Here are the reasons why I disagree with you. Reason 1 Blah blah blah blah…

That’s it. No discredit, no ad hominem , no false flag, true Scotsman, straw man, no sour, slander.

Originally Posted by guppie

Andy... looks like we agree on the TA. Don't worry. All the no voters will be "forced" into a new contract at the end of the week. This beauty will pass Easy (Like Sunday Morning) ahh ahh ahh ahh.