I am sure that the Union DID work their backsides off for 18months, nobody is disputing that fact. However, just because they spent that amount of time on it doesn't make it a reasonable proposal.
How can you defend a proposal that, for every single pension briefing, is presented to you in a different manner....as, more importantly, are the consequences of voting NO and other such gems like why cost pass through to the airlines is prohibited?! Is it just me that finds this odd?!