Originally Posted by tsquare

And again, I have never intimated otherwise. We have given up a lot. But a contract negotiations is just that... negotiations. The company is going to want something that we do not want. Ergo, what you and 88driver call a giveback will be asked for. You have three options. Agree to it entirely, say no, or try to soften the blow with a gain somewhere else. What I hear from you and him is that we have already given, so we will not do that. Got news for ya, that won't work. But Carl, Timmy and that bunch probably think we will be showing big balls if we go down that path. At least that is the impression I get from them... I firmly believe that we can get 100% restoration of payrates (whatever that is) on day 1. ONE HUNDRED PERCENT. Of course it might cost us some more productivity enhancements or 2 weeks of vacation, or maybe a minimum ALV of 90... but it could be done. Do you want that? So think about it again. Everything is negotiable.

Originally Posted by chuck416

The last two negotiations were not negotiations, by your above definition. We caved. Twice. We did recoup some of the lost wages in C2012, but in comparison to what we gave up in bankruptcy, I see little reason to gloat. We were mugged in the courtroom, and in C2012, we got crumbs, which 1/3 of the pilot group recognized for what it was.....a sellout. Our future contracts, for that matter all our contracts, should pass memrat in the high 80 percentile. Or, may I suggest that we change the moniker on the alpa pin from 'Unity' to simply 'whatever the majority wants'.

Originally Posted by chuck416

The last two negotiations were not negotiations, by your above definition. We caved. Twice. We did recoup some of the lost wages in C2012, but in comparison to what we gave up in bankruptcy, I see little reason to gloat. We were mugged in the courtroom, and in C2012, we got crumbs, which 1/3 of the pilot group recognized for what it was.....a sellout. Our future contracts, for that matter all our contracts, should pass memrat in the high 80 percentile. Or, may I suggest that we change the moniker on the alpa pin from 'Unity' to simply 'whatever the majority wants'.

Originally Posted by Denny Crane

So let me get this straight, you think that the minority should rule vs the majority? That will certainly lead to "Unity."

Denny

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

Denny, that's not what he said and that's not what you bolded. He said our contracts should pass by high 80 percentiles.

Instead, DALPA/management seem to target 50%+1, then DALPA gets an additional 10% by claiming there's no plan B, or our negotiators will resign, or you don't want to know how bad management's plan B will be if you vote this down, etc, etc.

Carl

Originally Posted by tomgoodman

Ideally, we would negotiate a TA which delighted 100% of the pilots, but tell management it was ratified by a margin of only one vote.
Then everybody's happy.

Originally Posted by tsquare

Is that what you and your boy are waiting for before you call the vote? 80%? or will 50%+1 be satisfactory in only that case? Hypocrite.

Originally Posted by newKnow

I'd be happy if our starting position was to ASK for a deal that delighted 100% of the pilots.

To me, it's unbelievable that we can't even agree if we should do that.

Originally Posted by newKnow

I'd be happy if our starting position was to ASK for a deal that delighted 100% of the pilots.

To me, it's unbelievable that we can't even agree if we should do that.