jdm wrote:Ah, I see you changed your post while I was typing mine.
FYI, I would have no problem with the TA being voted down if it was done honestly, but it wasn't. I got a lot of anonymous emails full of half truths and outright lies about that TA that were leaked from someone on the inside that wanted it to fail. If it was that bad, why not let it fail on its own merits?
And here's why I think I'm right: I voted for TA1. We ended up with something worse. So yeah, majority rules, but when you get a majority by whipping up a mob mentality with false info, the minority want to know who's responsible for that.
There was a radical element, sure. There is a radical element any time anything controversial is being discussed. There are radical elements in all aspects of politics.
TA1 was a piece of junk and deserved to fail. New hire poverty, SL5 pension, terrible scheduling rule changes, CARs limits and B scale wages at LCC. I could go on and on and on. IMO, and that of the majority, the bad vastly outweighed the good.
If people based their votes on some anonymous emails they received, and didn't take the time to read the TA and decide on their own, then they are stupider than I give them credit for.
When TA1 was voted down, no one foresaw the fact the the corp and gov't would collude so deeply. Interest based arbitration would have been one thing, and there are some opinions that if ACPA had voluntarily gone into arbitration there was the possibility of getting something better than TA1 had the replication theory been applied. FOS was designed for sports arbitration when ONE issue - MONEY, is the cause of the impasse. It was never thought up for complex issues such as a pilot agreement. Bill C-33 is an outrageous piece of legislation that unfairly favoured Air Canada and destroyed any hope of ACPA getting a fair settlement. There are many legal opinions out there that claim the Harper Government has violated international labour law with their draconian back to work bills.
I assume you have read both the corp's reply submission, our reply submission, and Stanley's report?
Like I said, mistakes were made in the months following the failed ratification. If we could go back and do things differently, hindsight being 20/20, sure, there are things that could have been done differently. Voting down TA1 and recalling those responsible for it would not be among them.