toganoflex
Veteran
- Apr 27, 2008
- 557
- 381
Ya, you're right. Its been brought up a thousand times already.
The nail in the coffin, right?
US Pilots' Labor Thread 4/28-5/5--NO PERSONAL REMARKS
- Thread starter Richard
- Start date
- Status
The nail in the coffin, right?
toganoflex
Veteran
- Apr 27, 2008
- 557
- 381
So let me guess.
Since we're going to have the whole show to ourselves one day, you figure we should let you have it all right now and wait our turn at an airline that may, or may not, be here in the near future.
No thanks, I'll stick with Nic.
Not sure what you mean by an "ALPA welfare case", but here goes.....comments were sincere. It pains me to see this pilot group so splintered. I'm an "east" guy, but the personal interaction with the "west" guys has been all positive. Voted for USAPA, not for seniority purposes (NIC doesn't impact me... low 500's), but I thought it would represent the whole group better than ALPA was doing over the past years. Yea, really!
"separate yourself from the melee".......no keyboard punching can do that.
After 9-11 we voted to pay cobra for furloughs. During the recalls, if I knew I was flying with a recall I would say "welcome back" and they would reply "thanks for paying that assessment".
lynyrdskynyrd
Veteran
- Apr 22, 2005
- 1,182
- 558
I voted yes for the furlough assesments as well, thats pretty much a hard wired yes vote for me, I was happy to do it for the post 9/11 furloughs too. Thanks Pi Brat, for seperating the politics, that was good of you.
The intent of the merger was to make a new airline, not have separate ops. I am flying routes that were never part of the America West system and you are flying routes that USAirways never flew.
I care about east pilots and employees because they are an integral part of my future should I decide to stay (go ahead and call me selfish). I will support the west side of the operation and the east side when applicable, because it is all the same. You do not have a separate USAirways any more, it is gone, get over it.
Have you deadheaded on West metal yet? I have carried numerous east crews deadheading on their scheduled pairing. I have not heard of West crews deadheading on east metal but it probably happens. I have carried mx parts to east stations where I doubt they are being inventoried just for West use. There are many more examples of the fact that although we have not completed pilot integration, the rest of the company has moved away from and is no longer in seperate ops.
traderjake
Veteran
- Aug 30, 2002
- 5,669
- 9,308
This sounds like what the A scale pilot's said when questioned about the B scale.
Just wait your turn and you can have our leftovers.
Thanks for your updates and insight I for one appreciate you experience and passion
What a concept you have is this new way of thinking?
pilotn79
Member
- Nov 21, 2008
- 76
- 0
Having spent three days in the courtroom myself, his posts are accurate.
You could always retire tomorrow.
nycbusdriver
Veteran
What!!!! And miss the circus????
hp_fa
Veteran
- Feb 19, 2004
- 3,290
- 178
You should say hi if you are there this week. I generally sit on the right side and have a yellow legal pad with me for my notes.
I actually don't bite....
electricjet98
Senior
Wish I could be there myself, but commitments won't allow it. Therefore, I certainly appreciate those that post their views, particularily those without an "ax to grind".
Many of the comments I've read concerning the current court proceedings discuss the jury's ability to fully understand all of the airline/union terminolgy and history that is being thrown at them by the two sides; something we are all very familiar with and take for granted. The Judge appears to be willing to let this in to give background to the case as a whole, but promises numerous times to narrow the scope of the jury's decision as quoted below:
THE COURT: Whether -- well, on the one hand I'm letting evidence in rather broadly about the background. On the other hand, I am instructing the jury, and I will do so, even more clearly, about the limitations of their task.
As I understand it, after the opposing counsel finish their mind-numbing presentation of evidence and make their closing arguements the Judge will give his final directions to the Jury. My opinion is that the jury will hear his direction to narrowly focus their efforts "on the limitations of their task", and will jump on that directive to make a relatively easy decision. Forget about any claims of "unfairness" or opinions regarding impasse; that is not what the jury will be directed to deliberate.
Many of the comments I've read concerning the current court proceedings discuss the jury's ability to fully understand all of the airline/union terminolgy and history that is being thrown at them by the two sides; something we are all very familiar with and take for granted. The Judge appears to be willing to let this in to give background to the case as a whole, but promises numerous times to narrow the scope of the jury's decision as quoted below:
THE COURT: Whether -- well, on the one hand I'm letting evidence in rather broadly about the background. On the other hand, I am instructing the jury, and I will do so, even more clearly, about the limitations of their task.
As I understand it, after the opposing counsel finish their mind-numbing presentation of evidence and make their closing arguements the Judge will give his final directions to the Jury. My opinion is that the jury will hear his direction to narrowly focus their efforts "on the limitations of their task", and will jump on that directive to make a relatively easy decision. Forget about any claims of "unfairness" or opinions regarding impasse; that is not what the jury will be directed to deliberate.
- Status
Similar threads
