ASA: Growth or Contract?

[Ganja60Heavy]

DO NOT USE personal cell-phones for Company business.

If necessary, return to the gate, shut down, enter terminal to find a phone. Unfortunately, this may cause extensive flight delays.

According to the FAA, it is illegal to even have a cell phone powered-up in the cockpit. Don't put your career at risk!

 

[AFELLOWAVIATOR]

I agree. We can't sacrafice customer service just to piss management off. Whether we like it or not, when we do harm to the companies reputation, it affects us as pilots negatively as well. I'm not saying that we need to be out there loading bags...thats not our job, and if we start doing that, they won't keep enough ramp staff because "the pilots can just help out." No, we really shouldn't be doing this, but we should be doing our job. I believe that the book says that we are supposed to call for a departure coordinator...is that correct? Regardless, there is a procedure to follow when the aircraft needs serviced and that is what we need to do. But we should not have this "screw ASA" attitude because that ulitimately effects our lifeline, which is our customers. We need to remember that...those people in the back of the plane, they aren't just passengers, they are customers and like Metro said, this industry is a customer service industry.

I understand what you are saying but....I don't think you can piss off pax much more than shutting down the airline like we did for 89 days, and they all came back....


Sometimes it takes a concerted effort to get mgt. to listen and if it means going by the book 100% you better be ready and willing to do it.

Just my opinion from experience.

 

[FL990]

Sometimes it takes a concerted effort to get mgt. to listen and if it means going by the book 100% you better be ready and willing to do it.

Just my opinion from experience.

Fella,

This is basically what I was suggesting. I think we are on the same page here. We should do OUR job, what the book says WE are supposed to do.

(The middle portion of this post has been deleted)

However, I would like to stress that I think it is important to maintain a high level of direct customer service to our passengers. The idea is to get the companies attention, not the passengers.

 

[surplus1]

FL990,

Pardon me for butting in. I understand what you're trying to say as well as your frustrations. At the same time I don't think you fully understand the process despite your good intentions.

It really doesn't matter what the union says or how carefully it is crafted. The union can't and should not do what you suggest.

The company keeps statistics on your operation. If those statistics suddenly change, regardless of the reason, the union will be accused of instigating an illegal job action. It really doesn't matter if the union did or it didn't. If the Company goes to court all it has to do is present the changed statistics and the judge will rule in favor of the company and enjoin the union. If the activity that caused the change in statistics, regardless of what it was, doesn't stop or if the stats don't return to what they were, the union will be blamed and so will individual pilots. Individual pilots could also be enjoined and probably would be.

Believe it or not Comair pilots were actually ordered by a federal judge not to make write ups of aircraft discrepancies. That happened even though the Company had no evidence of even ONE write up that was not legitimate or that was not required by the FARs. The judge ignored the FARs and issued an order that virtually required a pilot to ignore them. I'm not exaggerating, that's the truth.

Now maybe the Company won't take you to court, but if they do you aren't going to win. If I had to guess, my guess is they will take you to court. They've done that before and it worked; they'll do it again. Most Federal judges are anti-labor and they will NOT rule in your favor. I'm not suggesting that you should be "nice", but I am recommending that you should not be stupid.

Use your heads. The only way that writeups can suddenly increase, is is you have not been complying with the FARs and you suddenly decide to comply. The only way that delays can suddenly increase is if you have not been complying with company procedures and ops specs and you suddenly start to comply. How are you going to justify that you have been operating in violation of your own procedures and now all of a sudden you're going to "follow the book"? Why haven't you been following the book every day? Are you really ready to admit that you have not been making required writeups and "carrying" discrepancies; have not beeg complying with company procedures and ops specs? Sorry but it sounds to me like you've already dug your own hole, and now you want to pull the dirt in on yourself.

I know that's harsh, but I'm just trying to make the point of how what you suggest will look to others. They aren't going to see you as a bunch of good guys that have been "helping" the company and just don't want to help anymore. They're going to see you as taking an illegal job action. Remember, the person that will make the decision (a Federal judge) probably knows little or nothing about everyday airline operations and doesn't give a da_n.

Like it or not I will also tell you that if the company does take you to court, the ALPA will defend the ALPA and leave you to the wolves. It will NOT defend ASA pilots at ALPA's expense. You aren't UAL and you aren't DAL. Don't expect the same treatment from ALPA; you won't get it. ALPA will take care of itself long before it takes care of you. That's just the way it is. In case you're wondering where I got that idea, that is exactly what ALPA did when the company took Comair pilots to court. You don't have to take my word for it. Just read the transcripts of ALPA's arguments; they are public record.

From what I read in your posts, in general, your problem is not getting the Company's attention. Your problem is unity among yourselves. It is obviously lacking and sticks out like a sore thumb. You all don't agree with each other. Until you do or can at least give the appearance that you do, the Company will continue to ignore your negotiators.

A good example of your lack of unity is this thread. You are debating with each other, in public, whether or not you should exchange "growth" for a lesser contract. I can't tell you which one you should take, but I can tell you that until you are all on the same page the Company will continue to delay the process.

I'm an outsider and from what I read in this thread you are NOT on the same page. Whenever you figure out what you want and can say it with a single voice, the Company will begin to listen. They couldn't care less how many times you call on the radio or how many times you don't. Right now, if they are reading this thread, they will see the same thing that I see .... uncertainty and lack of unity in the pilot group. They will use that to their advntage and you can take that to the bank.

Sorry, but that's how I see it.

 

[FL990]

Surplus,

I do appreciate your input, and you are correct, I do not have a great deal of experience dealing with ALPA/Management and I do not doubt that ALPA would protect itself first over individual pilots.

I do question some of the statements you made regarding the federal judge order to discontinue MX write-ups. I'm not calling you a liar, but I am fairly certain that court orders like that wouldn't hold water in an appeal process. In addition, attacking individual employees for following company mandated procedure would most likely crumble in appeal as well. But, I do follow you on your criticism of my idea about the "letter" to the pilots from ALPA and that, according to your argument, I can understand would create legal problems...so I recant that post and will delete that portion of it.

However, I would like to further clarify my position on this entire matter of the contract. You are very correct with what you said about unity and this is what I have been pounding on through most of my posts here. As you clearly understand, the true power of the union is in unity. Without it, we are like a gun without ammo. Right now, the pilot group is very divided. Even though the majority of people on this board feel that the contract is the most important issue, there are many (I'm not saying the majority on the line, but there are many) that feel differently. There are many that feel more indifferent about the contract in order to gain growth.

Now, Me....I feel that BOTH are possible. The company is doing the best they can at keeping the wages down as long as possible. They are also trying to convince us that if we get a progressive contract, it will hinder our ability to compete with the contract carriers. I disagree with this position. Because all of our profits go directly to Delta INC., it is cheaper for Delta to use us when possible due to the fact that anything above and beyond the operating costs is essentially like taking money out of one pocket and putting it in the other. When they use CHQ/SKWst, they must not only pay for there op costs but there profit as well. That is real money that is gone and I don't believe over a large scale, especially when we are talking about ATL and CVG, that CHQ or SKY could operate for cheaper in these hubs (when factoring in there profit). I firmly believe that this is why they currently do not operate any 70 seat jets for Delta. THIS IS A PROFITABLE PLANE for Delta and they want to retain as much of those profits as possible(I'm not attempting to get into the argument of where the new 70's will go; thats a whole other argument). Anyway, getting back to the point. I was not trying to suggest that we revolt and create large scale problems for the company by eronious write-ups and lack of customer service. I was simply suggesting that we follow procedure. I am not militant union. Trust me..I'm also not management like some have suggested. I am just a line pilot who wants to see this thing resolved so that I don't have to fly with a bunch of whiny people anymore.

Again, thanks for the input and for correcting me.

 

[~~~^~~~]

The company is doing the best they can at keeping the wages down as long as possible. They are also trying to convince us that if we get a progressive contract, it will hinder our ability to compete with the contract carriers. I disagree with this position. Because all of our profits go directly to Delta INC., it is cheaper for Delta to use us when possible due to the fact that anything above and beyond the operating costs is essentially like taking money out of one pocket and putting it in the other. When they use CHQ/SKWst, they must not only pay for there op costs but there profit as well. That is real money that is gone and I don't believe over a large scale, especially when we are talking about ATL and CVG, that CHQ or SKY could operate for cheaper in these hubs (when factoring in there profit).

I don't know about SKW, but CHQ runs on a margin so tight that it seemed unsustainable as the airplanes get older and crews attain more longevity. ASA and CHQ are more mature companies. Our crews have more longevity, our airplanes are older and our operations more developed. CHQ is still run from the airport operations building in Indy - with cardboard boxes everywhere and a mid 70's Soviet government building feel. CHQ knows that its youth ( young crews and airplanes ) are the only way to keep operating at below real cost structures. As a result, CHQ is one very tough competitor - they must have growth, or they will die. The alternative is what ACA did. When the costs exceed the code share you can not lose money on every flight and make it up in volume

The other angle of this is ALPA National's agenda. They do not want the sub culture of regionals to be able to out vote the major establishment. Simultaneously, the pilots at Major airlines do not want to see cost savings ( from their concessions ) allegedly used to support the purchase of RJs' that they do not fly. The best mutual solution is for these airplanes to be bought by someone else and flown by pilots who do not vote contrary to the powers that be within ALPA. ( CHQ is Teamsters )

ASA has sent their negotiating team into the perfect storm. ALPA ( by denying ASA pilots the ability to sign a deal with Delta ) has pretty much cut the wing bolts off the good CRJ-700.

There are too many variables to figure out if a sub-par contract would indeed result in any growth for ASA. Any deal for future growth could be undermined by ALPA's mainline agenda, competitive pay cuts at other carriers, the price of oil, or Delta's inability to secure additional financing.

We ASA pilots have no real negotiaing power because ALPA's agenda keeps us from having any scope. However, we can achieve many cost neutral improvements in scheduling and quality of life. Delta is not going to take a strike over things like a commuter clause, seniority based reserve call out & bidding. we have those issues won if we stick to our guns.

The money is another story. The second ASA's costs exceed CHQ's Delta has no economic reason to sustain our operation other than protecting their investment. ( and I think we are amazingly close, perhaps within $10 per block hour with CHQ potentially having an advantage because of the more efficient E145 & less longevity )

On the big question of money - it is a very personal decision. More than likely you need to figure out if it worth losing this job and this Company to achieve what you feel your job is worth? I will absolutely stand beside my MEC no matter how long it takes and even if it shuts down the airline - but - I have the luxury of another career that pays much better than ASA. Many pilots are similarly situated, but striking is like quitting your job. It is a hugely personal decision. Given what we know about the situation, we should be considering these things when we reply to ALPA's calls from the Wilson Polling Center.

 

[ifly4food]

The other angle of this is ALPA National's agenda. They do not want the sub culture of regionals to be able to out vote the major establishment. Simultaneously, the pilots at Major airlines do not want to see cost savings ( from their concessions ) allegedly used to support the purchase of RJs' that they do not fly. The best mutual solution is for these airplanes to be bought by someone else and flown by pilots who do not vote contrary to the powers that be within ALPA. ( CHQ is Teamsters )

I don't think you can back that statement up with any tangible proof.
Please produce such or retract.

ASA has sent their negotiating team into the perfect storm. ALPA ( by denying ASA pilots the ability to sign a deal with Delta ) has pretty much cut the wing bolts off the good CRJ-700.

Please elaborate.

There are too many variables to figure out if a sub-par contract would indeed result in any growth for ASA. Any deal for future growth could be undermined by ALPA's mainline agenda, competitive pay cuts at other carriers, the price of oil, or Delta's inability to secure additional financing.

Agreed. In fact, if the RFP was any indication, even a pay cut wouldn't guarantee growth, it would just lead to another pay cut. Growth will go to whoever Delta desires, regardless of whether we trip over each other in a race to the bottom. Let's resolve not to race and let the chips fall. That's what our and Comair's MECs decided in December 2003.

We ASA pilots have no real negotiaing power because ALPA's agenda keeps us from having any scope. However, we can achieve many cost neutral improvements in scheduling and quality of life. Delta is not going to take a strike over things like a commuter clause, seniority based reserve call out & bidding. we have those issues won if we stick to our guns.

The money is another story. The second ASA's costs exceed CHQ's Delta has no economic reason to sustain our operation other than protecting their investment. ( and I think we are amazingly close, perhaps within $10 per block hour with CHQ potentially having an advantage because of the more efficient E145 & less longevity )

Whoa! Don't give up just yet!

I'd say we have quite a bit of leverage now that we're going to own about 50% of the ATL operation. That would be a HUGE loss if we slow it down, much less strike.

And that has nothing to do with scope. It amazes me how you manage to turn every discussion into one on scope. You truly have a one track mind.

On the big question of money - it is a very personal decision. More than likely you need to figure out is it worth losing this job and this Company to achieve what you feel your job is worth? I will absolutely stand beside my MEC no matter how long it takes and even if it shuts down the airline - but - I have the luxury of another career that pays much better than ASA. Many pilots are similarly situated, but striking is like quitting your job. It is a hugely personal decision. Given what we know about the situation, we should be considering these things when we reply to ALPA's calls from the Wilson Polling Center.

I for one, would rather find other employment than continue to work for compensation that is less than my share of what I produce for the company. I won't whore myself out just so that I can tell everyone I'm a pilot. I think most ASA pilots agree.

Chuck Thibadeau's "Zero Net Gain" concept is unacceptable. We will make measureable improvements in all sections of this contract or it won't pass, plain and simple. There will always be naysayers, and this and other boards tends to inflate the influence of the vocal minority. The truth is that ASA pilots are pissed and are not going to settle. We will either get an industry leading contract, or ASA will cease to exist.

And yes, management does read and post on this board. Don't let your guard down nor underestimate the will and unity of this pilot group.

ASA management has now admitted to financially supporting RJDC (Nelson D, Captain's Leadership Class, 11/23). Maybe the "quid pro quo" will be RJDC supporters like "fins" working to undermine our contract and blame it on "ALPA's Evil Empire".

 

[surplus1]

Surplus,
Again, thanks for the input and for correcting me.

You're most welcome. However, I really wasn't trying to "correct" you. I was only trying to give a different perspective from an outsider. Sometimes it is easier to be objective about these things when one is not emotionally involved.

I very much want you all to be successful in your negotiations. Call it self-interest if you like. There is no doubt that we will be affected by whatever you all decide to do.

I do question some of the statements you made regarding the federal judge order to discontinue MX write-ups. I'm not calling you a liar, but I am fairly certain that court orders like that wouldn't hold water in an appeal process. In addition, attacking individual employees for following company mandated procedure would most likely crumble in appeal as well.

It pleases me that you question some of my statements. That is exactly what you should do. On the issue of "appeals" you may very well be correct in believing that the judge's ruling would not stand on appeal. However, you need to consider this .... who will make the appeal? The allegation is brought, by the company against the ALPA and certain individual pilots. ALPA defends itself vigoroulsy. In making its defense, ALPA argues that it is not in anyway responsible for the alleged activity, it has all resulted from the radical behavior of the pilot group, certain individual pilots, and contrary to the wishes and instructions of the ALPA. The judge rules against the alleged activity but not against ALPA. In his ruling he sites certain individuals and more importantly, rules that he will hold any pilot, deemed to be engaged in this "illegal" activity, in personal contempt of the ruling. Now who is going to appeal that? Certainly not ALPA for they have already been exculpated, which is what they wanted. Therefore, any pilot accused after the ruling must face incarceration for contempt of court and defend himself from a jail cell. Where will he get the money to fight the company's battery of lawyers?

Remember, you can't "appeal" something just because you don't "like" the decision. There has to be a legal basis for the appeal; some "error" on the part of the judge or the court. That's a sticky wicket. ALPA is interested in protecting itself from potential fines (like the one levied against the APA) and will leave you to hang in a heartbeat. If you ever read that particular judge's decision (in the APA case) most logical people would think he was looney and prejudiced. Nevertheless, the APA lost every appeal. Why did the APA defend their pilots? Because those pilots are 100% of the APA. ALPA is a different horse and represents dozens of different airlines, not just one. ALPA will defend itself but it won't defend you.

In ALPA's arguments in the CMR case, the ALPA lawyers made no effort whatever to disprove any of the company's allegations. In fact they virtually admitted them (even though they were false) and simply argued that "ALPA had nothing to do with it". They won and so did the company. The only losers were the pilots.

When the courts ruled that Airborne pilots were "required" to pick up open time, even though their contract said it was "voluntary" the Teamsters took it all the way to the S. Court and ultimately won. In similar situations ALPA almost always backs down. ALPA almost always appeals rulings that adversly affect the institution itself, but seldom takes that course in defense of its members. ALPA defends the ship, not the crew.

Unless you're prepared to fund your own appeal I wouldn't put much stock in expecting your union to do it for you. Life is not always what it seems and we have to look at these things without rose-colored lenses. To put it simply, there aint nobody in Herndon that's going to risk the union's fortunes in your defense. Keep in mind that your group is a very, very small portion of ALPA's interests. It can readily be sacrificed and it will be if that should be deemed necessary. Just my opinion.

As you clearly understand, the true power of the union is in unity. Without it, we are like a gun without ammo.

I agree with you. That was my point too. A President of ALPA (not the present one) once told me "You should never point a loaded gun at the Company's head unless you're prepared to pull the trigger." He was right. If you pull that trigger without complete unity, you'll be salughtered, even if the gun is loaded. If you're shooting blanks you shouldn't even pretend that you have a gun. History tells us that Custer's last stand was anything but heroic; it was stupid. So was the "Charge of the Light Brigade". History repeats itself when we don't learn from it.

Right now, the pilot group is very divided.Even though the majority of people on this board feel that the contract is the most important issue, there are many (I'm not saying the majority on the line, but there are many) that feel differently. There are many that feel more indifferent about the contract in order to gain growth.

Unfortunately, that is what I gathered from the posts I read. I'm sure you know much more from your direct contact. Work on the solidarity. It must be complete and if you can't achieve it you don't have much of a chance. You can't even think about a legal job action unless you are certain that 95% of the pilots support it fully. The company can "read" the pilot group just as well as you or I can. They listen to everything you have to say and should never be underestimated.

Please don't think I'm against making a stand for what you believe is right. That's not what I'm saying. I come from an airline that made such a stand and the solidarity surprised everyone, literally. It is worth fighting for what is right even when you don't get it all. Neverthless, you look pretty foolish when you start rushing up the hill, pause, look back and there's noone behind you.

Now, Me....I feel that BOTH are possible. The company is doing the best they can at keeping the wages down as long as possible. They are also trying to convince us that if we get a progressive contract, it will hinder our ability to compete with the contract carriers.

Don't let that frustrate or upset you. That's the Company's job. It is what they're supposed to do. As long as your needs (not your wants) are not unreasonable or unrealistic it doesn't matter what they say. Being able to judge between what is unrealistic and what is not is the key to reaching an equitable solution. The final outcome needs to be a win/win. That is not easy to achieve. The reason the process takes so long is that both parties are trying to figure out what is reasonable, what is realistic, and what is not. Especially the company. They need to know where you really stand. As long as many of you are standing in different places they are not likely to agree to anything.

You need to understand that you will not get a Christmas Tree, and they need to understand that you won't settle for scraps. You're both playing a "game" and it's the equivalent of Chess, Poker and Dice, all at the same time. Most line pilots have trouble dealing with that. It's not what were accustomed to in our everyday lives.
Continued

 

[surplus1]

Part 2

Because all of our profits go directly to Delta INC., it is cheaper for Delta to use us when possible due to the fact that anything above and beyond the operating costs is essentially like taking money out of one pocket and putting it in the other.

That's partially true but not completely. Especially in the current situation in which the Company finds itself. How they got there can be debated, but it doesn't change the fact that they are there. Delta has a huge debt to repay and therefore the ability to borrow more money is very limited. Operationally, ASA and Comair may be actually "cheaper" than Chautauqua and both are "making money" for Delta. However, the way we are structured, Delta has to finance any new equipment that we acquire. When they go with CHQ or SKYW, those companies have to come up with the capital for new equipment, not Delta. I think that's a major factor in Delta's decisions. I also think that we, ASA & CMR, can't make up for that difference by lowering our pay. Just the same the Company has a strong arguement for farming out the future flying.

Sometimes it is better for us to focus on keeping what we already have than growing. That will test your unity for the "junior" pilots can only see "quick upgrades". Those same junior pilots tend to believe that the senior pilots will sacrifice them because they've already "got theirs". At the same time they fail to appreciate that concessions sacrifice the senior pilots, so that the juniors can get "growth". It pretty much boils down to whether or not you expect to stay where you are for a long time or you have dreams of the "quick upgrade" and moving on to another company. As long as the juniors see the seniors as "lifers" (in its derogatory context), you'll be divided amongst yourselves.

As long as you don't lose the jobs you already have, selling your souls for potential growth that is almost never guaranteed is, IMO, foolish over the long term. The "young" are often willing to give up their QOL for a few extra bucks and the promise of growth. That's because they are not convinced that they won't be flying for Delta mainline next month or anytime soon, or they would love to fly for JBlue because it has "big" airplanes. The more seasoned realize that more money glitters in the begining, but QOL once given up is almost impossible to recover. It is the job of your leadership to achieve balance between the two positions and get everybody on the same page.

I agree that the CR7 is a better and more profitable airframe. You may very well get more of them but that doesn't necessarily equate to "growth". I think it is more likely that the CR2 will be replaced by the CR7, long before there's a noticable increase in total airframes. That is also a form of "growth" when the compensation for the CR7 is greater than the CR2. When you do what SKYW did it amounts to a loss for the pilots, but a gain for the company.

I am just a line pilot who wants to see this thing resolved so that I don't have to fly with a bunch of whiny people anymore.

We would all like to see these things resolved quickly. That's the nature of pilots. However, it is not the nature of negotiations. The manipulation of the time-line is built into the Railway Labor Act. It's all based on the theory that the longer it takes, the more pliable the union will become and it gives management an upper hand from the start. The longer they can drag it out the more "reasonable" they believe you will become. The more frustrated you become, the more divided you will get and the more likely you will begin to "see things their way." The company has no "need" to settle the contract quickly they already know what they have and what it costs. It is you that wan't "more" 95% of the time.

The NMB has no interest whatever in the content of your contract. Their job and their only interest is to avoid a work stoppage. They will twist your arms a lot longer and a lot harder than even the company. They're not on your side. What they see as "realistic" is whatever will get an agreement and they don't care if you get the dirty end of the stick. The company is well aware of this.

Don't ask me what ALPA National thinks for you would not like my answer. Just look at the kinds of agreements they have been advocating an making at "regional" airlines and you'll have the answer.

Whatever you do, it is going to be done by ASA pilots alone. If you all get on the same page and stick together like glue, everything will come out OK in the end. Expect it to take a long time for it will. You must have solidarity and you must also have endurance. In collective bargaining there is nothing more virtuous than patience.

Best wishes.

 

[~~~^~~~]

Ifly4food:

Please refer to the Northwest Bridge / Investment Agreement dated October 21, 2004. In addition, you might refer to Chairman Mark McClain's comments in the Ziplines dated 18 October 2004. These are ALPA documents, printed with ALPA funds, endorsed by ALPA and available from your representational folks in Herndon, VA.

Take from these documents the following points:

1. NWA Pilots unilaterally decide who flies RJ-70's
2. NWA Pilots recieved a 15 million dollar credit for the RJ allowances ( thus using other ALPA member's flying as bargaining credit )
3. NWA can contract for additional 50-seat RJ flying-- provided that the aircraft are leased or owned by a non-NWA carrier

The third point is the most striking. MSA and PCL are now locked out of growth airplanes. ALPA states their reasoning for this restriction as to ensure that mainline cuts are not used to fund regional growth, but it also serves the purpose of limiting the resistance of MSA and PCL pilots. Less flying, fewer votes.

It concerns me greatly when I hear ( or read ) pilots like you, who I respect and appreciate, supporting ALPA's party line. Tom Wychor, MSA's MEC Chairman and an ALPA Bilateral Scope Comm. member, still parrots ALPA's "Brand Scope" while he sits and watches his pilots get excluded from growth airplanes. I earnestly hope to God the ASA MEC is not as misguided as Tom Wychor.

Any contribution from ASA's management to the RJDC would be illegal under the Railway Labor Act. Management can not interfere with the collective bargaining process like that. I'm guessing that the same people you are referring to continue to be ALPA members as well. It is my opinion that everyone should support the RJDC anyway - particularly the Delta pilots who have paid the highest price for ALPA's apartied scope policies. I may not like Chuck Giambusso, but if he wanted to support a good cause - fine by me.

We both see this ASA negotiation the same. It would be stupid to buy a promise ASA management can not deliver. But you must recognize that this whipsaw that undermines our negotiations is the exact whipsaw that ASA's MEC Chairman Bob Arnold warned ALPA National of four years ago.

So as a final source, I would like to refer you to the ASA MEC. I believed what Bob and Dave had to say in 2000 and nothing has changed. Every prediction they made has come true.

~~~^~~~

P.S. My pay would double while we are on strike. Not only can you count on my solidarity, I'll even send a couple catering trucks over with lunch like my friends did during the Comair strike. Nothing beats BBQ around a barrell!