You mean both the company and the union negotiators said the snap back language was weak at best and was never really thought to exist??
Or was it where TP's roommate (who helped write the agreement) who wrote wrote a letter to the pilot group recommending everyone to not support LOA93 because of the weak language?
Help me, just a little confused here.
The superior confidence of the DOH stance (and warned to move off of), the spectacular legal advice on the alleged RICO claim (dismissed with prejudice), fuel school, the recent response to the Kirby offer, and now the ramblings of Mike 'to tall' Cleary have me wondering about the gold standard of true unionism.