Originally Posted by Buck Rogers

"FUD" I understand. What is the term and acronym for the opposite side of the argument? All the "NO" voters based on the same thing "FUD" is based on.....Namely, emotion and conjecture.

What do we call that?

Originally Posted by Vsop

it’s all FOMO. They think, sometimes correctly, that theyre missing out on some precieved item.

Originally Posted by Buck Rogers

Nice "emotional response" dear...what logical arguments do you have?

Originally Posted by interceptorpilo

The NMB is literally paid to lie to us. They are there only to get a deal done. They don’t care how fair or just it is to either side.

Originally Posted by norcalflyer;[url=tel:3543195

3543195[/url]]How it came to be an AIP is important. If you think it's wise to say "hell no" and send it back, and think that will help our cause... think again, and read below first. This is not TA1 from 2015. We're in mediation now, and at the mercy of the mediator's timeline. The MEC and then we, the pilots, will vote as we wish... but just know that if we reject what was offered, the mediator will not release us... they'll park us. Why? Read below. What will that achieve? Read below... and decide whether you think an alternative path forward will help any of us in the long run. If you don't believe this... then contact your rep who was in North Carolina. Regardless of how they feel, they'll corroborate that this is how it went down...

---

What follows is possibly one of the most powerful pieces ever written about a contract negotiation. Please read and forward as you can. It comes from a representative on the horseshoe who remains anonymous for now as most of these conversations were in closed session. After the last contract negotiation Delta pilots learned a negative lesson by rejecting TA1 and coming back stronger with TA2. The piece below contradicts that negotiating technique directly and plainly. Pay particular attention to the second to last paragraph and the sentence that begins, “the NMB told us they’d park us if we rejected this deal…”. In most rational minds that should end the discussion right there. The next obstacle is ensuring this AIP becomes a Tentative Agreement upon which Delta pilots will be given the opportunity to vote.

“2.4 billion deal. Largest in history of any airline. Mediator said she'll never let us seek self help with that kind of money on the table.

Substantially moves bar up for entire industry so another group can't undercut us and weaken our position.

Home run on reroute pay as he explained it to me. Plus said we made a lot of gains in section 23 with no concessions.

Wins with vacation and training but had to be phased in because of staffing. ( bull**** to me )

No change to positive space or commuting policy.

Retro number will be based off flt pay+ advance pay but should be north of 80k for captains. Biggest retro payout in history of airlines.

Retirement was a big miss. 5 th most important item per polling data

More Money put into growing fleets. ER and 717 left out.

Lots of other gains that will be important to some and not to others.

Also from a rep:

Over half the seniority list will get between 22-25% on DOS due to the banding.

Also, inflation to the amendable date is 15.2%, which was the rhetorical argument we were able to succeed with.

I know, we wanted it to start with a 2, also. 20+. This was the best we could get. The NMB told us they’d park us if we rejected this deal and they refused to allow us to negotiate any further until middle of next quarter. Meanwhile, we’d be losing $100M per month in value.

We have no path to any more gains. We took everything we could get. Honestly, there’s nothing left, and the NMB told us to take it or leave it, and they’d not release us because they consider the Company exceeded the NMB’s expectations. 45% gains in this environment, the NMB said they won’t help us any more.

Originally Posted by Buck Rogers

"FUD" I understand. What is the term and acronym for the opposite side of the argument? All the "NO" voters based on the same thing "FUD" is based on.....Namely, emotion and conjecture.

What do we call that?

Originally Posted by cornbeef007

The original post was devoted entirely to the argument of why we should not send it back. Every selective quote was in defense of that stance and were made without the full context of conversations with reps or the mediator.

That is emotional and FUD. And the dear part reduces the validity of any input you may have.

Originally Posted by Buck Rogers

Nice "emotional response" dear...what logical arguments do you have?

Originally Posted by ebl14

Dude, give it a rest. You’ve posted this 4 times now all over the internet? Let’s read the damn thing before we start fear mongering and contemplating the “what ifs” based on “anonymous” sources. This is just as bad as the auto no voters.