Ehhh, kind of. Neither the company or the membership can afford a strike. They would paint us as the bad guy, that's why they've already put out our top rates to any media outlet that would post it, they're already ahead of the game on that front. But they do still have to shareholders to answer to and a lockout after one or even two denials of this contract would look really bad, especially in the midst of record profits. That said, a strike would cost the membership more jobs than any new job classification. Either strike/lockout would kill perceptual reliability/credibility in the eye of the public and would be more costly than anything in '97. It's a new world, the public relies on delivery more than ever, it wouldn't be the same as when they were on our side 21 years ago. In all fairness, this contract really isn't far off in my mind, mostly just a handful of scary language like "as long as work is available" and absolutely ZERO 22.4 protections.