CAL ALPA: UAL's Contract Dissenting opinion is out!

[eaglesview]

After the arbitrator sees through your arguments and places you under the CAL pilots you think you deserve to be ahead of you are going to be stuck with one thing, a sub par contract you voted in to try and steal up grades that were NEVER going to be yours. These were orders and upgrades from years before the merger and you guys were selling spare parts to make ends meet. As for your giant wide body fleet your 767 pays less then our 737 so how did that work out for you making money. I cant wait for the arbitrators award and hearing you guys cry about how it isn't fair and the contract sucks. Put your clickers away I have never been more wrong about a group of pilots that I thought were up for fighting for a good contract, what a bunch of cowards and underhanded bull sheeters.

Does not matter idiot, we'll be on the same contract. Our 100 more widebodies will do us well on the SLI so be sure and get the walkaround done before I get there, get the gear when I tell you and just shut up till spoken to.

 

[Continental]

Does not matter idiot, we'll be on the same contract. Our 100 more widebodies will do us well on the SLI so be sure and get the walkaround done before I get there, get the gear when I tell you and just shut up till spoken to.

More like I'll see you in recurrent. On your days off

I'll get the walk when I feel like it, throw gear when appropriate, and speak when I want to. You will never tell me how to do my job! Lets get that clear!

 

[list2002]

Feel the exact same way. I was looking forward to having the "hard line" United pilots in the fight with us.
That letter from Garth is pure poison to this future pilot group. Nothing would divide us more than this TA getting through. It's like he's giving all the panties an out. To the guy sick of hearing ME ME ME, your posts have been only about that. This contract passing will be 8 years of an entire pilot group living under a sub par contract and hanging their heads when asked where they work (except for those retiring soon). Garth tries to give l-UAL guys an out by saying it will be the Continetal guy's fault regardless, if it weren't for them we could vote based on the actual TA content. Nobody to blame but who voted yes.
Voting in a GUARANTEED IN WRITING concessionary contract, based on a PERCIEVED POSSIBLE CONSPIRACY that no one at said conspiring airline has heard of is insane. You come across like the dual of wits guy in Princess Bride.
Doesn't it concern you at ALL the extent that BOTH sides are going to to sell this?

 

[Flopgut]

Does not matter idiot, we'll be on the same contract. Our 100 more widebodies will do us well on the SLI so be sure and get the walkaround done before I get there, get the gear when I tell you and just shut up till spoken to.

No better than you've handled JP, I don't think you'll do too well with our merger committee. A little advice: Stow the attitude. No one has respect for you.

 

[Continental]

You come across like the dual of wits guy in Princess Bride.

That's inconceivable!

 

[flygirlqt]

Has it occurred to anyone (especially the Brain Surgeons) that the best way for pilots to forget that people in "various influential positions" have not delivered on numerous expectations, would be a leak with unfounded fears about SLI implications by rejecting this TA?

Before I left the CAL circus, I remember that CRM ground school where they showed the kids throwing the ball and the gorilla walks through the room, no one see the gorilla. Sort of the same thing going on here.

From a legal standpoint I have questions after reading the TPA about it's expiration. In numerous financial filings by UAL, it states replacement aircraft for ones being parked are slated for delivery on the LUAL side. The company is not set up for the disposition and transfer of assets like is being touted on here.

You are being played folks. Plain and simple.

 

[RT8VA]

Does not matter idiot, we'll be on the same contract. Our 100 more widebodies will do us well on the SLI so be sure and get the walkaround done before I get there, get the gear when I tell you and just shut up till spoken to.

I am a man first and although I suspect you wouldn't ever say that in person I can assure you the only walk I would be doing is off of the airplane and you could try and fly it alone. Thanks for the idiot comment but you better start looking at the last two mergers before you get too excited about the effect of your wide bodies. What you bring to the merger is what counts not what it ends up paying after the merger. I am done with this whole thread their are a lot of friends of mine at L-UAL that dont share your view.

Stop blaming every one when this is over and look in the mirror because you will be the one that voted yes.

 

[100/hour/5y]

LEC 153 Update for Monday, November 26th - We Get it

Monday, November 26, 2012

I. WE GET IT
We have thought long and hard, and we have realized something—we get it. For those of you who support this TA, it is not about the slap in the face of having pay rates that lag behind Delta’s by exactly a year. It is not about capitulating to 76-seat RJs and the trend of allowing larger RJs each time we negotiate a contract. It is not about the lack of retroactive pay that allows the Company to drag their feet at the expense of every one of us. No—it is not about any of those things.

What is driving you to support this TA is that you are afraid of what the future may bring. We get it—we are afraid of the future too!

We are afraid that we will be stuck with a contract that doesn’t compensate us appropriately for our level of professionalism. We are afraid that hindsight will reveal that we didn’t achieve as much in this TA as we could have. We are afraid that we will further erode our profession by establishing a precedent of never exceeding industry standard. We are afraid that ALPA’s strategy to success of pattern bargaining will become impotent. And lastly (and our biggest fear of all), we are afraid that this TA will drive such a giant wedge between the two pilot groups that the SLI process will seem pleasant by comparison.

The problem we see is that the rationale many are using to support this TA is that they “just want to get it over with.” While we understand and share everyone’s frustration and feel equally fatigued by the process, we aren’t quite sure why you would want to minimize and rush through such a huge undertaking. This is not a contract for the next few years—this is the contract that will define this new United pilot group forever. If it takes a few more months, then so be it. The short-term losses will be more than made up for by the long-term gains.

And by the way—for our L-UAL brothers and sisters who might stumble upon this update, please allow us to clarify one significant point: We have no secret agenda, no strategy to delay all of us getting a new contract, and absolutely no goal of perpetuating a whip saw! Our sole agenda is to secure a contract that will treat all of us as the safe and professional pilots we are. Period. End of story.

Those of us on the L-CAL side do have the advantage of knowing how this management team operates. Trust us when we are skeptical or think that something doesn’t seem right. We’ve seen it too many times, and we are trying to protect all of us.

Furthermore, this isn’t a race to the integrated seniority list either. We hear a lot of concerns about being the next America West/US Air. They are mired in SLI issues which prevent them from working on a JCBA. We have the benefit of learning from their mistakes and are working on the JCBA before we tread down that dark path of SLI. Quite honestly, if all of us were working under a contract that we truly felt was adequate and rewarding, who would really care if we didn’t have an integrated seniority list? We’d be too busy enjoying that warm feeling of confidence and respect to care about the Company’s ability to mix us together.

Lastly (and this is along the lines of a post script), you do realize that there is absolutely nothing you—or anyone else—can do to affect the outcome of the SLI, right? It will be decided by an arbitrator, and we would bet that just about everyone will wish they could vote “no” on the combined seniority list. That’s just the reality of it, so why fight with your professional brothers and sisters? How about we focus our frustration, anger, and fear towards management and make sure we are confident that the Company has reached as deep into their pockets as they can so that all of us can proudly put the United Airlines name on the cover of our new contract.

II. HITTING THE ROAD
As a reminder, in addition to the MEC/JNC road shows that are making their rounds starting this week, we are hosting our own special LEC meetings. Here are the schedules for both. All LEC 153 town hall meetings run from 1130–1400, and everyone is welcome.

November 28 and December 3
Gulliver’s
18482 MacArthur Boulevard
Irvine, CA 92612-1074
949-833-8411
Get directions
November 29 and December 5
Proud Bird Restaurant
11022 Aviation Boulevard
Los Angeles, CA 90045
310-670-3093
(The airport bus to Employee lot “E,” which is adjacent to the restaurant can be used.)
Get directions
December 7
Residence Inn San Diego Oceanside
3603 Ocean Ranch Boulevard
Oceanside, CA 92056
760-722-9600
Get directions

MEC/JNC Roadshows

LAX
December 12
Proud Bird Restaurant
0900–1300 and 1400–1800

SFO
December 13
SFO Airport DoubleTree
0900–1300

III. A WORD FROM YOUR SECRETARY-TREASURER
The upcoming TA vote provides a unique opportunity to explicitly direct your reps, committee members, and ALPA in general. You, as an individual ALPA member, will make a choice on whether this TA lives up to your expectations. As an ALPA rep, I cannot make this decision for you. It is my duty to provide you with clear and honest information about the choice you have. Clearly, a yes or no vote should not be based on fear. It should be based solely on your personal expectations using the best information you have available.

I am positive everyone will find flaws in this agreement, but I am also sure that everyone will find something they like. I have heard great arguments for both the yes and no votes. I will not advocate a yes or a no vote, but will do my best to provide clear information about the TA, so that each pilot can make his or her own decision.

Rob, Mike, and Josh​

 

[sniper]

Does not matter idiot, we'll be on the same contract. Our 100 more widebodies will do us well on the SLI so be sure and get the walkaround done before I get there, get the gear when I tell you and just shut up till spoken to.[/QUOT





That was not necessary.....come on

 

[100/hour/5y]

An Incredible Letter by UAL LC 27 Chairman

November 26, 2012


VOTE YES OR NO; BUT DON’T VOTE OUT OF FEAR


By now you have had the opportunity to begin reviewing the proposed TA the MECs sent to you by a 12-3 vote at United, and a 7-4 vote at Continental. The ratification window opens November 30, 2012 (this is a change) and closes December 15, 2012…

While other venues exist to explain each section of the TA, this “Chairman’s View” does not. One issue that pervades much of the discussion that I’ve heard recently is the question “What happens if the TA is voted down?”

If the TA is not ratified by the UAL & CAL pilots in a combined vote there are a couple of possible scenarios that I think you should consider:

First, the world will come to an end and everything bad that could happen to UAL pilots will.

Second, if the TA is turned down, and I believe this is a far more realistic scenario, the NMB will immediately come to ALPA to begin a focused effort to determine what modification (s) would increase the likelihood of a TA that could be ratified. Early in that process, the NMB, UAL & ALPA will meet to determine a reasonable schedule for resumptions of negotiations as all of the Parties have already agreed to in the Transition and Process Agreement and the 2012 extension of same name:

TPA.2-K. Mediation for a JCBA. If the JNCs do not reach a tentative JCBA by
October 12, 2010, the Parties (unless they otherwise agree) will apply to the NMB no later than October 14, 2010 under Sections 5 and 6 of the RLA, for mediation
of the JCBA. If at any time the JNCs reach a tentative JCBA but it fails to be approved, ratified or executed under ALPA procedures, the Parties will apply for or resume the NMB’s mediatory services, unless they agree not to do so.

Our job now is to evaluate and assess the TA before us. Did reading it make you happy? Is this what you expected? Does this TA reflect improved career security? Is our profession advanced with this agreement? Does this TA adequately reflect the value that pilots bring to this airline? Are you content living with this TA for the next 4-+ years?

Don’t be afraid to vote no if the TA does not sway you on its merits. There is no set timeline; but there is a process to follow. The two NMB officials that I have talked with said that the dynamics are different in each case. Remember, the NMB’s mandate is to get two parties to an AGREEMENT, not a holding pattern. Every presentation that I personally heard from NMB members was about guiding the negotiations toward an agreement. If this TA is voted down by the membership, the NMB will accept their Congressional mandate and bring the parties back to the table for further discussions. They will pressure ALPA as well as UAL to get to a deal that will be ratified. The NMB recognizes that TAs are on occasion voted down. It is part of the negotiation process. When was the last time the NMB parked negotiations after a NO vote if neither party requested a period of no negotiations? The answer is never. If someone says the company will walk away from negotiations, have them read the TPA. No party wants to walk away from their duties related to this merger, least of all the NMB.

The plan to create the world’s largest airline must have a combined pilot group to become a reality. Management knows our ratification timetable, and they know the negotiation/arbitration timeline for securing a single Integrated Seniority List. Smisek has always had his own timetable for signing a JCBA, completing the ISL process, and reaping the full rewards of this merger. He has stalled at every opportunity for 2.5 years. His purpose was to fatigue and frustrate; to divide and whipsaw; in short, to make us feel vulnerable and act out of desperation. Is this TA the deal you want? If so, then vote yes. If it is not, then consider your perspective when answering the question on the picket sign.

It is doubtful that there is a lot of sand left in Jeffery’s hourglass. If there was, why would he have attempted to negotiate shortening the SLI process last January? Why did he refuse to permanently bridge the terminable clauses in the original TPA and instead insist that there was a TA in place prior to a March 31, 2013 deadline in TPAx? Why do we continue to slog through all the assimilation phases of what laughingly is called training these days? Why did Fred’s friends freak out, insisting that every pilot order midnight blues from M&H by December 1?

A NO vote on the TA will not transform Smisek. He is who he is…and by every measure, so far, he is a failure as a Legacy CEO. He has painted the planes faster than anyone I‘ve ever seen, but everyone knows that paint is only skin deep. I know he believes his own PR…but does anyone else, anymore? Every previous merger related initiative by Smisek can accurately be described as Not Ready for Prime Time. From the rush to get SOC to the pax reservation system; from pass policy to IPAD deployment; from the industry denounced scheme to train in fixed based simulators to the massive shift of control over pilots’ lives in this TA…NRFPT!

His mentors were the historical villains of our industry and Jeffery, unlike his peer at DAL, is stride for stride burning all the bridges to a successful merger. Richard Anderson, DAL CEO, made a business decision to pay a premium to his pilots in order to get everyone pulling on the same end of the rope…it worked just like in the story books. Wall Street knows it, the customers know it, and we all know it. Smisek must succeed in completing this merger or his only fan will be his mother. He cannot take UAL to the promised land of this merger except through the JCBA; so, what is that key to “his” success worth to you? How much sand is left in the hourglass?

Another doomsday “scary” argument that some are making is really, in my opinion, just an attempt to further intimidate you and question your realistic and reasonable direction to the MEC. Management will pull all the “good stuff” out of the deal if we attempt to renegotiate. Really? How much “good stuff” is to be found? Does this make sense? How could they ever expect any deal if there was no “good stuff”? If there are enough pilots between the combined United/Continental group that vote NO, management will be compelled to find out what needs to be fixed. Remember, despite a strategy to make you think otherwise, Smisek wants and needs an agreement so he can get the integrated pilot group and begin to fly as one airline. Management gains no economic or negotiating advantage by trashing the deal out of spite or perceived buyer’s remorse. This is a deal they have crafted; let’s not kid ourselves! They WANT this thing done. They’ll posture and intimate that the deal will be different, but in the end they will have to work with us for a re-negotiated deal.

In June, Doug Parker at USAIR said, "We are obviously disappointed that our flight attendants chose to vote against ratification of a new contract," Doug Parker, US Airways' Chairman and CEO, said in a news release. "This tentative agreement was the result of years of deliberate negotiations and was achieved with the instrumental assistance and hard work of the National Mediation Board (NMB). It was also unanimously approved by the AFA negotiating committee. We will now consult with the NMB and AFA leadership to determine the best steps going forward to one day reach a ratified agreement.” This is boiler-plate language and you can expect to hear something very similar if this TA is rejected.

Whether you vote to ratify or not is completely your choice and your responsibility. As unionists, I know the members of C27 are not reluctant to stand up on their hind legs and live their principles. Remember, parroting fear based arguments is just another way to sell something. The “Key Men” who founded our union analyzed the risks and decided to engage the enemy in a business-like manner that would define a profession. Today, the decision is yours.

Your vote should be on the merits of the TA –
don’t vote out of fear.




Jeffrey Berg
Chairman, Council 27 / UALMEC

 

[100/hour/5y]

LC 153 Update 5 Dec 12 - Two Votes in One



I. TWO VOTES IN ONE
As expected, many of our pilots have communicated to us that they are pleasantly surprised, impressed, and even overjoyed by what they have read in the TA.

No...actually that hasn't happened. Not even once. In fact, we have yet to hear from a single pilot who believes this TA meets their expectations or is sufficient based on the actual contents of the TA. Not a single person.

Unfortunately, many of those who do support this TA do so for many reasons- few of which are out of support for the merits of the TA alone. That is a problem. That indicates that even though this TA represents the contract we could potentially be working under every day for a minimum of four years, our pilot group doesn't seem to care. And even worse, our pilot group lacks the confidence to fight for what we intrinsically feel we are worth.

We would like to make sure you are aware that when you vote for or against ratifying this TA, there are actually TWO distinct decisions involved in your vote.

The first decision you need to make is based solely on the merits of the TA: “Does this TA sufficiently represent the compensation, the respect, and the treatment I deserve as a professional pilot of what is to become the world's largest airline?” That should be a simple, logical, black & white, yes or no answer.

The second decision you need to make is where emotion, skepticism, hope, and a crystal ball come into play. Now you have to ask yourself: “Can we do better?” Obviously this question is a whole lot more subjective with a lot more factors at play. And this is the question that many of the supposed “factual” communications you've received are targeting.

We'd like to address just a couple of the misconceptions that we've encountered by pilots when making this second decision.

1. “I just want to get this over with!” So do we. The sooner this is over, the sooner we can get on with our normal lives. But do we throw in the towel just because we are tired? As we've said before, we have unprecedented leverage that most of us will likely not see again in our careers. This merger is not complete until we agree to a JCBA and an ISL. Should we throw this opportunity away just because we have lost interest or are worn down?

2. "If we vote this down we may be put on 'ice'.” That is definitely one possibility. It is also equally possible (or even more likely if the vote is close) that the company will quickly reengage. They know that they low-balled us with pay rates that lag behind Delta. They know that they are paying us pennies on the dollar for what they owe us in retro. They also know that if this fails, those- along with a few work rule improvements- are quick fix items.

This is a test. Actually it is more of a game for our management. The objective of this game is to spend as little as possible on our contract. Management hopes that this offer passes by as close to 50% as possible; anymore and they will come to the conclusion that they put too much on the table.

If this TA passes by a slim margin, they have won- successfully minimizing our value and our self worth. On the other hand, if this fails by a slim margin, it will give them an indication of how close they are and how much more they need to add to get this TA to pass.

While voting “no” will not necessarily get us the contract of our dreams, it will at least ensure that we don't foolishly leave anything on the table. Voting “no” on this first offer will also inject a dose of confidence into our pilot group and demonstrate our resolve and unity to management.

Furthermore, while you have seen examples of how negotiations have been drawn out when the first offer was rejected, we would like to offer you an example right from our own “backyard” of when the parties reengaged in short order. In October 2007, the Continental Flight Attendants, represented by the IAM, rejected their first offer. Mr. Smisek even threatened them that he would walk away from the table. Just a few months later they ratified an agreement that included the pay raises of the initial offering as well as a signing bonus that wasn’t previously included. Apparently it can happen.

Also, keep in mind that none of the examples included in the MEC communications mentioned the unprecedented situation we are in today. As we said above, we are the last component of this merger. Until we have a JCBA, this merger is not complete. We are in the driver’s seat. Don’t forget that!

3. “I'm worried what will happen when the TPA expires.” For those of you who hadn't noticed, anytime after March 31, 2013, the company can unilaterally terminate five provisions or the TPA, four of which have to do with flying protections. Our brothers and sisters on the L-UAL side are worried about an impending whipsaw. The reality is that they will not spontaneous combust, as they have been lead to believe. There are still backstop protections in their 2003 CBA (namely, section 1-F and a Supplemental Agreement dated October 9, 2007) that dictate the minimum block hours L-UAL can operate. In addition, based on their scope protections, if they reduce mainline flying by much, the company will be forced to reduce their outsourced express flying as well, and they don't want to do that.

There is also another game in play here (in addition to management’s “50% plus one” game). This game is to see how effectively management can divide and conquer our two pilot groups. By pitting us against each other, they know they can destroy any unity we have and take advantage of us in the process. The fear of a whipsaw plays right into their hands.

4. “I just want to get this SLI process done!” You want to knowingly settle for an inadequate contract so that you can suffer through the SLI process that is guaranteed to be just as trying and perhaps even more stressful? Assuming you actually enjoy (or previously enjoyed) your profession of flying airplanes, don't you think it would be much more pleasant (read: less tortuous) if you at least had a decent contract going into the SLI process? We can assure you that having a contract that you don't despise would help reduce the sting that about 90% of us are going to feel when that ISL is published.

And remember- we are supposed to be industry leading pilots at an industry leading airline lead by the best paid management money can buy. You won't ever be a leader by settling for second best.

II. GOOD NEWS AND BETTER NEWS
In our last update, we mentioned the little “gem” that effectively reduced our lump sum payout by about 6.2% (or $24, 800,000 total). The relevant language is quoted below from LOA 24:

“The Company will pay $250,000,000 of the $400M Amount (the “$250M Amount”) to pilots in connection with the effective date of the Agreement and in accord with Paragraph 3.E. and 3.G of this Letter of Agreement. The $250,000,000 shall be the total payment amount, and any fringe benefits or other payments that are legally or contractually required to be made or increased in amount because of the payments to individual pilots herein (e.g., defined contribution retirement contributions, social security, payroll taxes) shall not increase the Company’s financial liability beyond the $250,000,000.” [emphasis ours]

(This restriction applies to the second “tranche” of $150 at ISL as well.)

As it turns out, yesterday we were officially informed that this has been "reinterpreted" (renegotiated) with the company, and they will now be paying their share- as the employer- of the FICA taxes. This is good news because it means an additional 6.2% into our pockets. This is even better news because it proves that the company is not only willing to renegotiate but also that they are willing to reach deeper into their pockets

IV. STILL MAKING THE ROUNDS
We still have one more Local Council special meeting on Friday, December 7, in Oceanside for our pilots who live down south. The last four meetings have been great opportunities to hear your perspectives about this TA and have your questions answered.

The MEC/JNC roadshow will also be coming to LAX on Wednesday, December 12 and SFO on Thursday, December 13. These are the best opportunities to hear from the JNC and subject matter experts, as well as have your questions answered by them.


Rob, Mike, and Josh

 

[minrest]

While voting “no” will not necessarily get us the contract of our dreams, it will at least ensure that we don't foolishly leave anything on the table. Voting “no” on this first offer will also inject a dose of confidence into our pilot group and demonstrate our resolve and unity to management.

Wow, these guys are already starting to manage expectations should the TA be voted down. It's no longer about getting a contract of our dreams, it's mearly a check to be sure that we don't leave anything on the table. It sounds like they've figured out that there isn't much more to get out of management except a rearrangement if deck chairs and now they want to cover their bases in case the next ta is no better or worse than the first.

 

[HA25]

so it looks like we're going to get to put the USAir debacle aside as the reference for how not to merge two airlines shorty. This may well become the most embittered pilot group since Delta bought Western... Sad to see all the infighting and bitterness. ONLY WORKS TO HELP MANAGEMENT.

True when they say we're our own worse enemies.

 

[Ex737Driver]

Wow, these guys are already starting to manage expectations should the TA be voted down. It's no longer about getting a contract of our dreams, it's mearly a check to be sure that we don't leave anything on the table. It sounds like they've figured out that there isn't much more to get out of management except a rearrangement if deck chairs and now they want to cover their bases in case the next ta is no better or worse than the first.

So we should have taken the previous offer of DAL +1 to save us the headache, right? That way we would have been 100% sure that there was something left on the table, you spineless management wannabee.

 

[Yuppyguppy]

Utter fools

 

[nimtz]

Utter fools

Originally Posted by PBRstreetgang
This is gonna be interesting. Talked to a couple of UAL guys in the security line, word is to get DAL type contract they will have to give up 90 seaters......... and these guys thought it was OK.
Amazing!
PBR

TOTAL LIE!!! This was not said by UAL guys. You either givem to us and the f'ing 70s or we shut your a$$ down in due time.

Yep we sure are taking it back!

 

[minrest]

So we should have taken the previous offer of DAL +1 to save us the headache, right? That way we would have been 100% sure that there was something left on the table, you spineless management wannabee.

I'm sorry, did the company ever offer us DAL +$1? No. When our negotiating committee analyzed the offer that you speak of, it was quickly determined to have an overall cost well under that of DAL. So, what did they do? They flat out rejected it.

The current JCBA costs well exceed that of DAL beginning in 2014 and blow it away in the years that follow. Was it "worth the headache" to wait out and continue to negotiate with the company? Yes, that is the point of negotiations.

I don't put much weight in the LAX reps opinion, nor do I put that much more in any of the other Reps. They are all pilots, like myself, not professional negotiators. The opinions that I do seek are those of our hired, professional negotiators and attorneys. These guys have been through countless negotiations and have even taken airlines (such as Spirit) through strikes. I have talked to one of the them and read the information put out the collective group, and they make a very professional, unemotional appeal that taking this contract back to the table makes little sense and will, in all likelihood, lead to a cost neutral (or negative) 2nd TA.

Those are facts, from professionals. Not emotional garbage being spewed by either the "No" or "Yes" camps.

But, don't take my word for. Get to a road show or call your rep and see if there is an opportunity for you to talk to a negotiator or attorney.

 

[nimtz]

Our "hired professional negotiators and attorneys" were the same guys that swore Contract '02 was the only option other then BK. Wow great track record there Mr Luby. Btw went to a road show and read everything that has been published. NO

 

[PCL_128]

I wish we could have a real-life "It's a Wonderful Life," but instead make it "It's a Wonderful Career," where you idiots get to see what life would really be like if you had your way and ignored the attorneys, professional negotiators, and other experts, and just did what your macho attitude lead you to do. We'd all be making $5/hr and working 26 days a month without labor contracts by now.

 

[EngineThunder]

Says the Gulfstream Grad. How much did you PAY to sit in that right seat again? Hypocrite.