You need to shut your pie hole you real airline wannbe
CLT Employee Incident
- Thread starter LD3
- Start date
redeye
Senior
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2007
- Messages
- 263
- Reaction score
- 0
YVINTERN
Veteran
Excuse me? Would you please come to DCA and say that to my face? That's what I thought...
Mod's please delete that comment...uncalled for as I am IN the airline industry at some capacity unlike jtwhat.
waaaaah go cry us a river and for ur info iam a bus capt. little baby. Unlike you a mesa airline freeloader with always a complant go look at your mess of a airline before you make wise a`` remarks about awa pilots.
Dog Wonder
Veteran
What does this have to do with the thread?
Edward
Veteran
Two posters & you know who you are are looking at serious time off with one more remark after this. Now back to the topic.
InternationalShannon
Veteran
Goooooooooooodnesss sakes. This whole thread makes me sad. The topic and the reactions, and the ugly comments.
Let's all go to Montego Bay and chilllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll
llllllllllllllllllllllllll
GOSH!
Let's all go to Montego Bay and chilllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll
llllllllllllllllllllllllll
GOSH!
Going back a few pages someone tried to compare this to Parkers incident. I'd like to point out a few differences. First off, it was likely PArkers vehicle. If it was leased, well it muddies te waters some. In the CLT case it was a Company vehicle, and I assume it had logos. In Parkers case he was not on the clock (except when you consider that as CEO he's always on call), the CLT employee, as I understand it, was.
A Union is obligated to represent their members. Even though many of us feel the IAM is not doing this overall, they still bear that obligation, and thus the employee is entitled to representation. Part of that representation is to get the best outcome for the employee. If CLT is ANYTHING like LAS management screwed to termination up and he'll be back on a "technicality". If they did it properly then the employee will NOT be back no matter what the IAM does.
If you've been drinking you don't belong at work. I'm not talking drunk, I'm talking drinking. At all. It far too dangerous, and violates both Company policy AND the law. THAT aside, I hate drunk drivers. If the allegation is factual, and the employee was in fact drunk, I hope he gets everything that's coming to you, and that his family can find some way to sucessfully deal with the situation he put them in.
A Union is obligated to represent their members. Even though many of us feel the IAM is not doing this overall, they still bear that obligation, and thus the employee is entitled to representation. Part of that representation is to get the best outcome for the employee. If CLT is ANYTHING like LAS management screwed to termination up and he'll be back on a "technicality". If they did it properly then the employee will NOT be back no matter what the IAM does.
If you've been drinking you don't belong at work. I'm not talking drunk, I'm talking drinking. At all. It far too dangerous, and violates both Company policy AND the law. THAT aside, I hate drunk drivers. If the allegation is factual, and the employee was in fact drunk, I hope he gets everything that's coming to you, and that his family can find some way to sucessfully deal with the situation he put them in.
InternationalShannon
Veteran
You are exactly correct - - we don't even let pax SIT on our planes if we THINK they're drunk, so why would we be able to employ people with known drinking-on-the-clock issues.
It is dangerous and could ruin the company if an alcohol influenced employee caused a fatality somehow...
