TA is here
09-24-2022, 02:00 PM
#244
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2018
Posts: 694
If you're so confident in this passing in blowout fashion, why do you keep coming back to bash anyone who says they're voting no? That behavior doesnt exude confidence. If it's a forgone conclusion why waste your time posting emojis every 5 minutes?
09-24-2022, 04:16 PM
#245
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,264
I have yet to hear a good reason why a no voter thinks 6 months from now makes for a good negotiating environment. Yeah Delta voted their TA1 down in 2015 and got a new one a short while later. But 2015 and 2016 were great years for the economy (minus the one dip in the DOW and S&P). We are nowhere near that sort of economy. This administration and Powell have made it CLEAR they will raise interest rates and control crash this economy to a landing (they aren’t even saying soft landing any more). Another raise in November. Another in Q1. And then hold that level (maybe even more raises) until inflation decreases and demand dampens, and *hope* that supply chains open up (like China not doing zero Covid policy, Ukraine v Russia gets better, etc). We are literally headed off the cliff in terms of a good environment to negotiate. I genuinely ask what sort of leverage do you see to get whatever it is that would get you to vote yes to this in a TA#2. I think we can all agree no scenario makes 3300 pilots happy. I question what is enough to make the no pilots happy in round 2 during the worst economy to negotiate in.
prdu you’ll call me defeatist, I call it realist after looking at the economic conditions we face and considering that the EFA vetted our current deal.
prdu you’ll call me defeatist, I call it realist after looking at the economic conditions we face and considering that the EFA vetted our current deal.
There is reason to believe that 2023 offers some hope both for the larger economy and for the airline industry.
In an interview yesterday, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen explained that she expects 2023 to be a better year than 2022 in terms of inflation with a target of two percent for next year.
Raoul Pal, former Goldman Sachs fund manager, founder of Real Vision, and publisher of Global Macro Investor, asserted in a recent discussion that a year from now, "We will have seen a recession and we will likely be coming out of it. Whether we're fully out of it or not doesn't matter. A recession at some point in the future means that the federal reserve will stop hiking and will stop shrinking the balance sheet. And they will probably go toward cutting in the future. In twelve months time, the probability of inflation being at eight percent is extremely low."
Bloomberg reported in June that IATA expects the fortunes of the global airline industry to improve in 2023, with North American carriers leading the way. It expects North American airlines to post a collective profit of $8.8 billion 2022 followed by the rest of the global industry returning to profitability in 2023.
It sounds as though, while many economists acknowledge the risk of recession in the next year, it appears many of them also believe that we will be climbing out of it by this time next year. Even in the midst of a possible recession, demand destruction in the airline industry is expected to be minimal if it ends up existing at all.
Over the summer, IATA Director General Willie Walsh told Bloomberg that he anticipates capacity to be restricted in the US domestic market "for some time to come" due to restrictions around the minimum hours required for commercial airline pilots. In other words, IATA doesn't expect the issue of a pilot shortage in the US to resolve itself anytime soon. One way to view the pilot labor market is in terms of supply and demand. If supply is constricted as Director Walsh predicts, and demand remains robust, price for our services should experience upward pressure. Given all of the above, there is a decent chance that the fair market value for our services will rise - if we don't torpedo ourselves by agreeing to lower total contract values than the market will support out of fear of worst case scenarios.
In terms of the macro economic environment, we are not necessarily, as you describe, "headed off a cliff in terms of a good negotiating environment." There is a counter argument to be made on that point.
But there remains, in terms of negotiating leverage, factors far more favorable to labor than whatever impact the global macro economic environment might produce.
Think about what just happened with the national consortium of twelve railroad unions representing more than 100,000 workers and 40% of America's freight capacity. What leverage did they have? And what was the source of that leverage?
Their leverage stemmed from the fact that they posed the credible threat of bringing the operations of the companies they worked for, along with the entities that depended on them (like AmTrak), to a screeching halt. And the source of that leverage was the right they had under the Railway Labor Act (RLA) to march down the path toward self help. It's the exact same leverage you at Alaska have available to you and, being almost a year into mediation with near-unanimous strike authorization vote (SAV) behind you, you're much further down the path of fully developed RLA leverage than most of the other airlines currently in negotiations.
If the National Mediation Board (NMB) was willing to declare an impasse in the railroad workers' dispute that jeopardized the entire national economy in the midst of spiking inflation and already-compromised supply chains, why would it not be willing to do so in the case of Alaska Airlines? Because some towns and villages in Alaska might have their supplies cut off?
The railroad workers entered mediation in January of 2022. They were released from mediation in June of this year. That is an insanely short time in mediation. Why do you think it was so quick?
It might have something to do with the fact that the political composition of the NMB changed late in 2021 from two GOP members and one Democratic member to two Democratic members and one GOP member. When the vote to release the rail workers from mediation was conducted in June of this year, guess which NMB member voted to keep them in mediation? That's right, the GOP member cast the dissenting vote and the two Democratic members of the NMB voted to release the rail workers. This change in the composition of the NMB is a potentially very significant development for labor that very few pilots are talking about.
Following their release from mediation, the rail workers then went into a mandatory 30-day cooling-off period. In July, President Biden established an optional 60-day Presidential Emergency Board (PEB), during which time self-help was prohibited. The PEB was due to expire Friday, September 16. Magically, On September 15, railroad management, who had refused to relent to the workers' demands for relief on sick days up to the very end, caved to the pressure placed on them by the rail workers and the Biden administration with less than 24 hours remaining before a strike would have commenced.
Would Congress have intervened? I don't know. Two GOP Senators attempted to initiate legislation that would have forced the rail employees back to work while foregoing their demands for more sick days but Senator Sanders blocked them. Even if a Democratic House would have passed a bill forcing the workers back to work, would Biden have signed it into law? If so, how many days would the strike have gone on before all of that would have been hashed out legislatively?
Alaska entered mediation in the fall of 2021. You conducted a nearly unanimous SAV in May of this year. You've already been in mediation longer than the rail workers were when they were released. Your SAV has already demonstrated tremendous unity around the idea of using the leverage available to you under the RLA. You are so close yet panicky displays of melting resolve like yours demonstrate how far you guys might actually be.
Good faith bargaining does not require Alaska to accept a milquetoast agreement. Alaska's pilots do not have to accept this TA out of fear the mediator or the NMB might somehow think their negotiating team wasn't reasonable enough. In a 2009 case brought by Spirit ALPA against Spirit, the court asserted, "movement toward the position of the other side is not a requirement of good faith bargaining." It cited an example from a Trans International Airlines flight attendant dispute that had reached another court:
The union disputed the claim that there would be a cost increase estimated to be 294% but Chief Judge Peckham found it simply "unnecessary to the resolution [of the good faith bargaining issue] to determine the actual figures. [The airline] is effectively asking the court to hold that the sheer size of the Teamsters' economic demands, and the distance between the parties after a long period of negotiations, amounts to a lack of reasonable effort by the union to reach an agreement." The district court concluded it was forbidden by "'the strong federal labor policy against governmental interference with the substantive terms of collective-bargaining agreements'" from pursuing the matter further ... neither the size of one party's demands nor the "distance between the parties after a long period of negotiations" "amount to a lack of reasonable effort . . . to reach an agreement...
the potential to occur when passengers find out that their flights may be cancelled, or disrupted, because the NMB released the parties from mediation in accordance with RLA Section 5 (Section 155) and triggered the potential for a work stoppage. Airline passengers with today's technology and access to reservation systems have the potential, en masse, to immediately reschedule their flights to try to avoid possible disruptions to their travel plans, thereby causing a potentially substantial loss of revenue/business that precedes the PEB, its report, or the potential for any work stoppage.
Do you think Alaska management wants to deal with passengers booking away from their airline if your pilot group were to hold strong and get released? Do you think that this sort of book-away effect wouldn't give your pilot group significant leverage even before a strike occurred? How long do you think Angle Lake would want to deal with passengers booking away from them?
And, in the extremely unlikely event you guys actually ended up on strike, how long do you think the strike would last? How long has the average mainline pilot strike in the US lasted in the last 25 years? Would it last as long as the four-day Spirit strike in 2010? The 14-day Northwest strike in 1998? The 24-minute American strike in 1997? Could you not handle, worst case, two weeks walking the line for the betterment of your profession, yourself, and your family?
Would management try to break the strike with scabs in the midst of a historic pilot shortage?
You have far more leverage than you are alluding to you when you ask in an as-if-we-are-helpless shrinking violet, chicken little sort of way, "I genuinely ask what sort of leverage do you see to get?"
Are you serious? Do you understand how the RLA works? Do you understand how much untapped leverage you all have?
Last edited by Lewbronski; 09-24-2022 at 04:57 PM.
09-24-2022, 04:45 PM
#246
Line Holder
Joined APC: Sep 2022
Posts: 36
The position you have adopted may or may not be a "realist" position. But it may also be a pessimistic, sky-is-falling type of position.
There is reason to believe that 2023 offers some hope both for the larger economy and for the airline industry.
In an interview yesterday, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen explained that she expects 2023 to be a better year than 2022 in terms of inflation with a target of two percent for next year.
Raoul Pal, former Goldman Sachs fund manager, founder of Real Vision, and publisher of Global Macro Investor, asserted in a recent discussion that a year from now, "We will have seen a recession and we will likely be coming out of it. Whether we're fully out of it or not doesn't matter. A recession at some point in the future means that the federal reserve will stop hiking and will stop shrinking the balance sheet. And they will probably go toward cutting in the future. In twelve months time, the probability of inflation being at eight percent is extremely low."
Bloomberg reported in June that IATA expects the fortunes of the global airline industry to improve in 2023, with North American carriers leading the way. It expects North American airlines to post a collective profit of $8.8 billion 2022 followed by the rest of the global industry returning to profitability in 2023.
It sounds as though, while many economists acknowledge the risk of recession in the next year, it appears many of them also believe that we will be climbing out of it by this time next year. Even in the midst of a possible recession, demand destruction in the airline industry is expected to be minimal if it ends up existing at all.
Over the summer, IATA Director General Willie Walsh told Bloomberg that he anticipates capacity to be restricted in the US domestic market "for some time to come" due to restrictions around the minimum hours required for commercial airline pilots. In other words, IATA doesn't expect the issue of a pilot shortage in the US to resolve itself anytime soon. One way to view the pilot labor market is in terms of supply and demand. If supply is constricted as Director Walsh predicts, and demand remains robust, price for our services should experience upward pressure. Given all of the above, there is a decent chance that the fair market value for our services will rise - if we don't torpedo ourselves by agreeing to lower total contract values than the market will support out of fear of worst case scenarios.
In terms of the macro economic environment, we are not necessarily, as you describe, "headed off a cliff in terms of a good negotiating environment." There is a counter argument to be made on that point.
But there remains, in terms of negotiating leverage, factors far more favorable to labor than whatever impact the global macro economic environment might produce.
Think about what just happened with the national consortium of twelve railroad unions representing more than 100,000 workers and 40% of America's freight capacity. What leverage did they have? And what was the source of that leverage?
Their leverage stemmed from the fact that they posed the credible threat of bringing the operations of the companies they worked for, along with the entities that depended on them (like AmTrak), to a screeching halt. And the source of that leverage was the right they had under the Railway Labor Act (RLA) to march down the path toward self help. It's the exact same leverage you at Alaska have available to you and, being almost a year into mediation with near-unanimous strike authorization vote (SAV) behind you, you're much further down the path of fully developed RLA leverage than most of the other airlines currently in negotiations.
If the National Mediation Board (NMB) was willing to declare an impasse in the railroad workers' dispute that jeopardized the entire national economy in the midst of spiking inflation and already-compromised supply chains, why would it not be willing to do so in the case of Alaska Airlines? Because some towns and villages in Alaska might have their supplies cut off?
The railroad workers entered mediation in January of 2022. They were released from mediation in June of this year. That is an insanely short time in mediation. Why do you think it was so quick?
It might have something to do with the fact that the political composition of the NMB changed late in 2021 from two GOP members and one Democratic member to two Democratic members and one GOP member. When the vote to release the rail workers from mediation was conducted in June of this year, guess which NMB member voted to keep them in mediation? That's right, the GOP member cast the dissenting vote and the two Democratic members of the NMB voted to release the rail workers. This change in the composition of the NMB is a potentially very significant development for labor that very few pilots are talking about.
Following their release from mediation, the rail workers then went into a mandatory 30-day cooling-off period. In July, President Biden established an optional 60-day Presidential Emergency Board (PEB), during which time self-help was prohibited. The PEB was due to expire Friday, September 16. Magically, On September 15, railroad management, who had refused to relent on the workers' demands for relief on sick days up to the very end, caved to the pressure placed on them by the rail workers and the Biden administration with less than 24 hours remaining before a strike would have commenced.
Would Congress have intervened? I don't know. Two GOP Senators attempted to initiate legislation that would have forced the rail employees back to work while foregoing their demands for more sick days but Senator Sanders blocked them. Even if a Democratic House would have passed a bill forcing the workers back to work, would Biden have signed it into law? If so, how many days would the strike have gone on before all of that would have been hashed out legislatively?
Alaska entered mediation in the fall of 2021. You conducted a nearly unanimous SAV in May of this year. You've already been in mediation longer than the rail workers were when they were released. Your SAV has already demonstrated tremendous unity around the idea of using the leverage available to you under the RLA. You are so close yet panicky displays of melting resolve like yours demonstrate how far you guys might actually be.
Good faith bargaining does not require Alaska to accept a milquetoast agreement. Alaska's pilots do not have to accept this TA out of fear the mediator or the NMB might somehow think their negotiating team wasn't reasonable enough. In a 2009 case brought by Spirit ALPA against Spirit, the court asserted, "movement toward the position of the other side is not a requirement of good faith bargaining." It cited an example from a Trans International Airlines flight attendant dispute that had reached another court:
And beyond all of the above, Alaska's pilot group have barely begun to flex the muscle it has available to it under the RLA. One of the primary sources of leverage under the RLA available to labor groups like pilots is called the "book-away phenomena." The book-away phenomena occurs before a strike. It is described by the current Acting Director of the Office of Mediation Services at the NMB, John Livingood, on his website about the RLA, as having:
If Alaska's pilots were to approach a release from mediation and much more so, if they were to actually be released, news stories would be published telling the public something like, "Alaska pilots released from federal talks. Strike possible in 30 days." What would you do if you heard, for example, Southwest Airlines (my airline) pilots might be on strike six weeks from now and you needed to be in Austin for a wedding then? You could buy tickets on Southwest, Alaska, American, Spirit, Frontier, and others. But let's say SWA's tickets were $100 cheaper than anyone else's tickets. Would you still buy the SWA tickets if you really needed to be in Austin or City X for a wedding or whatever other important event? Or would you book away from SWA onto some other carrier that was assured to not be on strike on the date of your travel?
Do you think Alaska management wants to deal with passengers booking away from their airline if your pilot group were to hold strong and get released? Do you think that this sort of book-away effect wouldn't give your pilot group significant leverage even before a strike occurred? How long do you think Angle Lake would want to deal with passengers booking away from them?
And, in the extremely unlikely event you guys actually ended up on strike, how long do you think the strike would last? How long has the average mainline pilot strike in the US lasted in the last 25 years? Would it last as long as the four-day Spirit strike in 2010? The 14-day Northwest strike in 1998? The 24-minute American strike in 1997? Could you not handle, worst case, two weeks walking the line for the betterment of your profession, yourself, and your family?
Would management try to break the strike with scabs in the midst of a historic pilot shortage?
You have far more leverage than you are alluding to you when you ask in an as-if-we-are-helpless shrinking violet, chicken little sort of way, "I genuinely ask what sort of leverage do you see to get?"
Are you serious? Do you understand how the RLA works? Do you understand how much untapped leverage you all have?
There is reason to believe that 2023 offers some hope both for the larger economy and for the airline industry.
In an interview yesterday, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen explained that she expects 2023 to be a better year than 2022 in terms of inflation with a target of two percent for next year.
Raoul Pal, former Goldman Sachs fund manager, founder of Real Vision, and publisher of Global Macro Investor, asserted in a recent discussion that a year from now, "We will have seen a recession and we will likely be coming out of it. Whether we're fully out of it or not doesn't matter. A recession at some point in the future means that the federal reserve will stop hiking and will stop shrinking the balance sheet. And they will probably go toward cutting in the future. In twelve months time, the probability of inflation being at eight percent is extremely low."
Bloomberg reported in June that IATA expects the fortunes of the global airline industry to improve in 2023, with North American carriers leading the way. It expects North American airlines to post a collective profit of $8.8 billion 2022 followed by the rest of the global industry returning to profitability in 2023.
It sounds as though, while many economists acknowledge the risk of recession in the next year, it appears many of them also believe that we will be climbing out of it by this time next year. Even in the midst of a possible recession, demand destruction in the airline industry is expected to be minimal if it ends up existing at all.
Over the summer, IATA Director General Willie Walsh told Bloomberg that he anticipates capacity to be restricted in the US domestic market "for some time to come" due to restrictions around the minimum hours required for commercial airline pilots. In other words, IATA doesn't expect the issue of a pilot shortage in the US to resolve itself anytime soon. One way to view the pilot labor market is in terms of supply and demand. If supply is constricted as Director Walsh predicts, and demand remains robust, price for our services should experience upward pressure. Given all of the above, there is a decent chance that the fair market value for our services will rise - if we don't torpedo ourselves by agreeing to lower total contract values than the market will support out of fear of worst case scenarios.
In terms of the macro economic environment, we are not necessarily, as you describe, "headed off a cliff in terms of a good negotiating environment." There is a counter argument to be made on that point.
But there remains, in terms of negotiating leverage, factors far more favorable to labor than whatever impact the global macro economic environment might produce.
Think about what just happened with the national consortium of twelve railroad unions representing more than 100,000 workers and 40% of America's freight capacity. What leverage did they have? And what was the source of that leverage?
Their leverage stemmed from the fact that they posed the credible threat of bringing the operations of the companies they worked for, along with the entities that depended on them (like AmTrak), to a screeching halt. And the source of that leverage was the right they had under the Railway Labor Act (RLA) to march down the path toward self help. It's the exact same leverage you at Alaska have available to you and, being almost a year into mediation with near-unanimous strike authorization vote (SAV) behind you, you're much further down the path of fully developed RLA leverage than most of the other airlines currently in negotiations.
If the National Mediation Board (NMB) was willing to declare an impasse in the railroad workers' dispute that jeopardized the entire national economy in the midst of spiking inflation and already-compromised supply chains, why would it not be willing to do so in the case of Alaska Airlines? Because some towns and villages in Alaska might have their supplies cut off?
The railroad workers entered mediation in January of 2022. They were released from mediation in June of this year. That is an insanely short time in mediation. Why do you think it was so quick?
It might have something to do with the fact that the political composition of the NMB changed late in 2021 from two GOP members and one Democratic member to two Democratic members and one GOP member. When the vote to release the rail workers from mediation was conducted in June of this year, guess which NMB member voted to keep them in mediation? That's right, the GOP member cast the dissenting vote and the two Democratic members of the NMB voted to release the rail workers. This change in the composition of the NMB is a potentially very significant development for labor that very few pilots are talking about.
Following their release from mediation, the rail workers then went into a mandatory 30-day cooling-off period. In July, President Biden established an optional 60-day Presidential Emergency Board (PEB), during which time self-help was prohibited. The PEB was due to expire Friday, September 16. Magically, On September 15, railroad management, who had refused to relent on the workers' demands for relief on sick days up to the very end, caved to the pressure placed on them by the rail workers and the Biden administration with less than 24 hours remaining before a strike would have commenced.
Would Congress have intervened? I don't know. Two GOP Senators attempted to initiate legislation that would have forced the rail employees back to work while foregoing their demands for more sick days but Senator Sanders blocked them. Even if a Democratic House would have passed a bill forcing the workers back to work, would Biden have signed it into law? If so, how many days would the strike have gone on before all of that would have been hashed out legislatively?
Alaska entered mediation in the fall of 2021. You conducted a nearly unanimous SAV in May of this year. You've already been in mediation longer than the rail workers were when they were released. Your SAV has already demonstrated tremendous unity around the idea of using the leverage available to you under the RLA. You are so close yet panicky displays of melting resolve like yours demonstrate how far you guys might actually be.
Good faith bargaining does not require Alaska to accept a milquetoast agreement. Alaska's pilots do not have to accept this TA out of fear the mediator or the NMB might somehow think their negotiating team wasn't reasonable enough. In a 2009 case brought by Spirit ALPA against Spirit, the court asserted, "movement toward the position of the other side is not a requirement of good faith bargaining." It cited an example from a Trans International Airlines flight attendant dispute that had reached another court:
And beyond all of the above, Alaska's pilot group have barely begun to flex the muscle it has available to it under the RLA. One of the primary sources of leverage under the RLA available to labor groups like pilots is called the "book-away phenomena." The book-away phenomena occurs before a strike. It is described by the current Acting Director of the Office of Mediation Services at the NMB, John Livingood, on his website about the RLA, as having:
If Alaska's pilots were to approach a release from mediation and much more so, if they were to actually be released, news stories would be published telling the public something like, "Alaska pilots released from federal talks. Strike possible in 30 days." What would you do if you heard, for example, Southwest Airlines (my airline) pilots might be on strike six weeks from now and you needed to be in Austin for a wedding then? You could buy tickets on Southwest, Alaska, American, Spirit, Frontier, and others. But let's say SWA's tickets were $100 cheaper than anyone else's tickets. Would you still buy the SWA tickets if you really needed to be in Austin or City X for a wedding or whatever other important event? Or would you book away from SWA onto some other carrier that was assured to not be on strike on the date of your travel?
Do you think Alaska management wants to deal with passengers booking away from their airline if your pilot group were to hold strong and get released? Do you think that this sort of book-away effect wouldn't give your pilot group significant leverage even before a strike occurred? How long do you think Angle Lake would want to deal with passengers booking away from them?
And, in the extremely unlikely event you guys actually ended up on strike, how long do you think the strike would last? How long has the average mainline pilot strike in the US lasted in the last 25 years? Would it last as long as the four-day Spirit strike in 2010? The 14-day Northwest strike in 1998? The 24-minute American strike in 1997? Could you not handle, worst case, two weeks walking the line for the betterment of your profession, yourself, and your family?
Would management try to break the strike with scabs in the midst of a historic pilot shortage?
You have far more leverage than you are alluding to you when you ask in an as-if-we-are-helpless shrinking violet, chicken little sort of way, "I genuinely ask what sort of leverage do you see to get?"
Are you serious? Do you understand how the RLA works? Do you understand how much untapped leverage you all have?
09-24-2022, 05:48 PM
#247
Line Holder
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 69
It’s actually pretty simple. A NO vote gives the NC ammunition at the table. If the NC has been insisting these economics won’t pass and the CO thinks they will, well, we need to provide the proof. The company has a track record of not believing our representatives.
09-24-2022, 06:40 PM
#248
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jul 2021
Posts: 35
The NC wants you to vote NO
To prevent the Alaska pilot from becoming the scourge of the industry I hope this TA receives an overwhelming NO vote. The industry is waiting for the first TA of this era to be ratified and if this TA is ratified the Alaska pilots will be responsible for dragging down the entire industry. I implore all the airline pilots from all the other airlines that are in or about to enter contract negotiations to tell their NC's and MEC's to not even think about bringing a TA like this to them.
I understand why the Alaska pilot may be compelled to vote yes but you must fight the Stockholm Syndrome and years of beatings. You are airline pilots at a 90 year old major legacy US airline, start demanding to be treated like an airline pilot at a 90 year old major legacy US airline and stop acting like a frightened, beaten housewife.
I understand why the Alaska pilot may be compelled to vote yes but you must fight the Stockholm Syndrome and years of beatings. You are airline pilots at a 90 year old major legacy US airline, start demanding to be treated like an airline pilot at a 90 year old major legacy US airline and stop acting like a frightened, beaten housewife.
09-24-2022, 06:48 PM
#249
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: This side of the dirt.
Posts: 897
To prevent the Alaska pilot from becoming the scourge of the industry I hope this TA receives an overwhelming NO vote. The industry is waiting for the first TA of this era to be ratified and if this TA is ratified the Alaska pilots will be responsible for dragging down the entire industry. I implore all the airline pilots from all the other airlines that are in or about to enter contract negotiations to tell their NC's and MEC's to not even think about bringing a TA like this to them.
I understand why the Alaska pilot may be compelled to vote yes but you must fight the Stockholm Syndrome and years of beatings. You are airline pilots at a 90 year old major legacy US airline, start demanding to be treated like an airline pilot at a 90 year old major legacy US airline and stop acting like a frightened, beaten housewife.
I understand why the Alaska pilot may be compelled to vote yes but you must fight the Stockholm Syndrome and years of beatings. You are airline pilots at a 90 year old major legacy US airline, start demanding to be treated like an airline pilot at a 90 year old major legacy US airline and stop acting like a frightened, beaten housewife.
