You are smart: you have patiently and politely listened to the repetitive arguments trying to make you believe not trying to change anything is the best choice.
I should not worry or doubt one second your capacity to see through this attempt and in fact I don't.
It's more my own frustration of having been forced to listen silently because I know better than wasting energy in useless debates.
Therefore I'll resist the temptation to go on and on when our daily reality is the best antidote.
Please excuse the few remarks I cannot prevent myself to make: at least you are not obliged to read them and thank you if you do with all my apologies for not being the best advocate I'd like to be for our own common interests.
As I think about what we heard today and what I am trying to summarize now I feel it's like closing arguments in a trial.
During those 5 sessions Lionbridge has tried to convince us they are on our side and that our best interests are better taken care of by dealing with them on a one on one basis.
They have to convince us of that so that we decide and vote against our own interests: our best interest is not aligned with Lionbridge's best interest, at least the way LB is presently managed.
LB only wants to maximize it's profits by giving us as little as possible.
This situation is best defended by preventing us to organize and present a united front.
They have to convince us a union is a bad idea that is against our own interests while of course the exact oppose is true.
If they have been able to make you believe the present balance of power is the most favorable to your interests they'll win.
I am always amazed when people vote against their own interests but it happens very often.
Such is the power of the dominant ideology: the ideas that are the most frequently expressed, that represent the dominant interests, dominate.
In our case LB's dominant self interest is to keep paying us as little as possible, as they have managed to do and as they kept telling us they would continue to do.