[tomtimtall]

This logic sounds like an argument for chopping of you hand if it falls sleep.

There is an obvious and straightforward way of getting those 12000 people to work again. There is no argument for firing them just because they are striking outside of petty displays of power and pure stupidity.

[beerandt]

Firing people in a high position of trust and responsibility who have just broken that trust isn't a petty display of power.

And how is it stupid to conclusively resolve an ongoing dispute that intentionally threatens national air travel? Just because one side loses doesn't make the decision 'stupid'.

Replacements were found and the world didn't end.

The notion that labor isn't replaceable when their demands exceed their replacement costs is absurd, no matter how skilled they are or how critical their work is.

Especially when the opponent is the government, the one entity that gives unions their power of monopoly, and the one opponent who doesn't need to act rationally when determining "replacement costs".

[dijit]

If they could be replaced then the notion of it being illegal because they were "absolutely required" should be called into question.

You can't make it illegal to strike on the grounds of it being dangerous; then fire everyone for it with little or no issue: it just tells us that the reasons for it being illegal were bullshit.