I have no idea what you are talking about. But, in simplest terms, please chime in on why any of the 6 LUS negotiators would sign a new JCBA if it involves giving up our health care and scope??? What we don't have is shift differ [$400 a year FTE shift sensitive] , or about 8 more paid days off [$1,500 FTE a year for argument sake]; .50 cent more into retirement [$1,000 a year est], more favorable double time. So, let's say the avg LUS has up to $3,000 more to gain per year, but gives up an avg of $1,500 in health care; and scope. It could very well get into the minus column pretty quickly unless there is a big fat $10,000 signing bonus that is attached that can get peeps to bite, or additional solid wage rates in 2017. Why would any LUS person sign a JCBA at cost neutral? What compels them?As far as the TWU, they left a lot on the table thus far and have a lot more to gain. By my calculations, they have about $15,000+ to gain. Not even considering scope. So, if I were a TWU member, I'd be hoping for a new JCBA soon. You have been consistently wrong by predicting a new JCBA in May, then June, then July, and then September, and now by the end of the year. Good Grief! Sorry weasel but you are wrong again. Say hello to the Easter Bunny for me.BTW, the company hasn't had any problem with job protections provided that no new stations are covered. With the LUS agreement prohibiting new stations, regardless of flight activity, and the cross utilization being recognized by the TWU, stations like RSW, DTW, IAH, etc can continue to be vended stations. So, it prolly wasn't so much brilliance but rather fairness. But if you add it all up, all of us LUS members should support this contract 100%. I'm always a lean towards protecting the current members as opposed to the unborn.