Imjustsayin
Advanced
- Jul 9, 2010
- 114
- 13
My guess is this individual is considering the cost of back pay for lost wages over the intervening years since furlough.
I find it very interesting that the union ran to this deal under threat of congressional action - however remote. It suggests to me deep down they know what was done back in 2002-2004 time frame is indefensible.
I thought the attendants at AA would be glad to see people returning to work.