negotiator

It's not about the art of 'give and take' it's about 'knowing what 'the intrests of both sides are to arrive at a mutual win'!

It seems to me that AC want's the 777 and 787's because the purchase of the Boeings fits within their long term strategic plans to expand into markets that they can compete in the best. This includes the economics associated with the proposed settlement that's now been declined by ACPA.

From what I've heard, the more junior pilots are concerned about the seniorty issue of the dovetailed Canadian pilot's who, in their opinion, jumped the que. If that's the case, then the issue is squarely the problem of ACPA and they have to straighten it out before the company can respond. That said, it is the AC's turn to attempt at a resoultion but only after the pilot's get their 'collective' act together once they reign in their members and read them the 'riot act'. If ACPA leadership does not get a firm idea where the bottom line interests of their members are they'll lose along with the Company.

There's one other thing but it is politically damaging to the leaders of the ACPA.

Under existing jurisprudence, it is possible, and legally permissible, for the ACPA to agree to the proposal without a vote of it's members. In other words, the union, as the holder of the bargaining rights for the group, can legally ratify the 'amendement' to the existing collective agreement without a vote. Because this is not a renewal of an existing collective agreement but rather an amendment to it through the resolution of a question that has yet to be bargaining such an approach is permissible. Unfortunatly, this would likely mean that the existing executive of ACPA would be booted from office next term but it's an option if the member's don't come together on the issue.

I would not abandon talks yet. There's plenty of room to carve out a deal yet and given what's at stake on both sides (as usual) then the parties must come to a resolution no matter what the consequences.

Cheers