Severance pay and War
- Thread starter cat 111
- Start date
- Thread Starter
- #2
Rumor has it if you get laid off and George W. goes to war you will not be able to collect severance pay.The company will be after more in another month.
[STRONG][EM]And so when the President goes to war that leaves you where. An unpatriotic selfish and unjustly dealt with citizen. Never forget what took place that accelerated our problems.[BR][BR]I think when the President goes to war our troops, lives, and freedom are on the line and we should show our support and go with him.[/EM][/STRONG]
- Thread Starter
- #4
Usair's problem started with Wolf. The guy had no clue how to run an airline. All he wanted to do was sell it and become rich. Now Alabama Dave wants to threaten the employees.He has already run off many passengers because of his big mouth.The company has lied to it's employees time after time.
Fleet Service Agreement Article 10 {Furlough Allowance} A1
War emergency the company is NOT liable for fulough allowance payments..........
War emergency the company is NOT liable for fulough allowance payments..........
Dea Certe
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 889
- 0
US Air's problems started way before Wolf and Gangwal came on board. Wolf was too busy trying to make a merger with UAL to pay attention and Gangwal was just flat out incompetent. But you have to give them some credit for our what-use-to-be superior FF program. And the wine selection in F/C was much better. I still think the "Illusions of Excellence" was a good program. Many people did learn people skills and better grooming.
As far as "war" goes, are we not already dropping bombs in Iraq from drones? Haven't we already started troop deployment to the Persian Gulf? I have a niece whose husband was notified to report in two weeks for deployment to parts unknown. Absolutely we need to support our men and women going into battle for us. They aren't responsible for the mess in Iraq or Korea. But do keep in mind the men sending these young folks into harm's way didn't really do any military service. Dubya was in the National Guard but didn't really show up. I don't believe Cheney was in the military at all and Rumsfeld only served in the Reserves.
So, what actually triggers the 5% deferral of our pay? When do we get it back? Will we get the interest on it?
Gee, I wish I could go back to watching the Cartoon Channel but since the Foghorn Leghorn trauma, it's been too scary to risk.
As far as "war" goes, are we not already dropping bombs in Iraq from drones? Haven't we already started troop deployment to the Persian Gulf? I have a niece whose husband was notified to report in two weeks for deployment to parts unknown. Absolutely we need to support our men and women going into battle for us. They aren't responsible for the mess in Iraq or Korea. But do keep in mind the men sending these young folks into harm's way didn't really do any military service. Dubya was in the National Guard but didn't really show up. I don't believe Cheney was in the military at all and Rumsfeld only served in the Reserves.
So, what actually triggers the 5% deferral of our pay? When do we get it back? Will we get the interest on it?
Gee, I wish I could go back to watching the Cartoon Channel but since the Foghorn Leghorn trauma, it's been too scary to risk.
[blockquote]
----------------
But do keep in mind the men sending these young folks into harm's way didn't really do any military service. Dubya was in the National Guard but didn't really show up. I don't believe Cheney was in the military at all and Rumsfeld only served in the Reserves.
[/blockquote]
Yeah and Uncle Bl%#job Clinton and his draftdodging cronies ran off to England and let other people's kids die in THEIR places. Oh yeah Albore went over to Vietnam as a "reporter". I wonder how many reporters got pampered over there like Albore did. The poster child for all you W bashers is Hanoi Jane Fonda and Sean Penn - yeah there are two "heros" ( I thought the penalty for treason during wartime was death by the way)
----------------
But do keep in mind the men sending these young folks into harm's way didn't really do any military service. Dubya was in the National Guard but didn't really show up. I don't believe Cheney was in the military at all and Rumsfeld only served in the Reserves.
[/blockquote]
Yeah and Uncle Bl%#job Clinton and his draftdodging cronies ran off to England and let other people's kids die in THEIR places. Oh yeah Albore went over to Vietnam as a "reporter". I wonder how many reporters got pampered over there like Albore did. The poster child for all you W bashers is Hanoi Jane Fonda and Sean Penn - yeah there are two "heros" ( I thought the penalty for treason during wartime was death by the way)
The original contract states the company can sever you without pay in the event of war. I interpret this to mean no bennies, as well.
Concessions, Part II (Cp2)spells out what the company calls war. Sustained aerial bombardment outside of the current no-fly zone, or the introduction of ground troops. Cp2 also calls for a 5% wage concession in the event of the above, which is reasonable, in my view. Revenues will go further south should hostilities commence. But the company is hoping you'll focus on Cp2, and forget Article 10 in the CBA. Shame on the unions for not highlighting this.
Certainly, I am prepared to sacrifice my job to save my country. I'd enlist, if they'd let me. My folks have been in every scrap since the Revolution.
But I am opposed to management taking advantage of the war on terrorism for business purposes - words out of Gangwhal's mouth, by the way.
And while I'm supporting the Commander in Chief, would it be too much for corporate America to do the same? Maybe retain residence in the good ole USA, and pay the taxes that arm and pay the troops that are defending their sorry a$$es?
Concessions, Part II (Cp2)spells out what the company calls war. Sustained aerial bombardment outside of the current no-fly zone, or the introduction of ground troops. Cp2 also calls for a 5% wage concession in the event of the above, which is reasonable, in my view. Revenues will go further south should hostilities commence. But the company is hoping you'll focus on Cp2, and forget Article 10 in the CBA. Shame on the unions for not highlighting this.
Certainly, I am prepared to sacrifice my job to save my country. I'd enlist, if they'd let me. My folks have been in every scrap since the Revolution.
But I am opposed to management taking advantage of the war on terrorism for business purposes - words out of Gangwhal's mouth, by the way.
And while I'm supporting the Commander in Chief, would it be too much for corporate America to do the same? Maybe retain residence in the good ole USA, and pay the taxes that arm and pay the troops that are defending their sorry a$$es?
BillLumbergh
Veteran
[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/31/2002 9:41:16 AM diogenes wrote:
.
would it be too much for corporate America to do the same? Maybe retain residence in the good ole USA, and pay the taxes that arm and pay the troops that are defending their sorry a$$es?
----------------
Maybe if the Democrats would stop taxing the hell out of them and trying to redistribute people's hard earned money to all the slackers of the world, maybe the companies would come back to the US
----------------
On 12/31/2002 9:41:16 AM diogenes wrote:
.
would it be too much for corporate America to do the same? Maybe retain residence in the good ole USA, and pay the taxes that arm and pay the troops that are defending their sorry a$$es?
----------------
Maybe if the Democrats would stop taxing the hell out of them and trying to redistribute people's hard earned money to all the slackers of the world, maybe the companies would come back to the US
[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/31/2002 10:39:20 AM exagony wrote:
[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/31/2002 9:41:16 AM diogenes wrote:
.
would it be too much for corporate America to do the same? Maybe retain residence in the good ole USA, and pay the taxes that arm and pay the troops that are defending their sorry a$$es?
----------------
Maybe if the Democrats would stop taxing the hell out of them and trying to redistribute people's hard earned money to all the slackers of the world, maybe the companies would come back to the US
----------------
[/blockquote]
------------------------------------------------------------
The last I checked, I'm paying a higher percentage of my income in taxes than much of the Fortune 500.
----------------
On 12/31/2002 10:39:20 AM exagony wrote:
[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/31/2002 9:41:16 AM diogenes wrote:
.
would it be too much for corporate America to do the same? Maybe retain residence in the good ole USA, and pay the taxes that arm and pay the troops that are defending their sorry a$$es?
----------------
Maybe if the Democrats would stop taxing the hell out of them and trying to redistribute people's hard earned money to all the slackers of the world, maybe the companies would come back to the US
----------------
[/blockquote]
------------------------------------------------------------
The last I checked, I'm paying a higher percentage of my income in taxes than much of the Fortune 500.
The last I checked, I'm paying a higher percentage of my income in taxes than much of the Fortune 500.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Too bad you can't prove it.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Too bad you can't prove it.
[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/31/2002 4:16:25 PM exagony wrote:
The last I checked, I'm paying a higher percentage of my income in taxes than much of the Fortune 500.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Too bad you can't prove it.
----------------
[/blockquote]
------------------------------------------------------------
Easier than pie, sir.
The little fact regarding taxation was called to my attention shortly after that well known duo of Marxists, George Schultz (Sec. of State) and Don Regan (Chief of Staff), called it to the attention of their Commander in Chief, and well known fellow traveler, President Ronald Reagan, for whom I seditiously voted - twice. This was during the ramp-up for simplifying the tax code in the 80's. The pair of Stalinists had the audacity and gall to point out that Reagan's secretary paid more, as a percentage, in taxes than much of corporate America. Reagan professed astonishment; I was outraged. So I began educating myself on this matter.
Two must reads are authored by Kevin Phillips, chief political analyst for the 1968 Republican presidential campaign and, later, assistant to the attorney general. He's also a member of the political panel of the WSJ (sounds like he's a pinko-lefty, too). The books are titled The Politics of Rich and Poor, and Boiling Point.
I refer you to page 111 of Boiling Point.
Sources of Funds for Federal Spending
personal income tax/ payroll tax/ corporate income tax
1950's 42.0% 11.5% 26.9%
1960's 42.0% 18.4% 20.4%
1970's 40.3% 27.7% 13.3%
1980's 38.0% 29.2% 07.7%
I left off estate taxes and borrowing.
So there you have it, sir, and every source cited a Republican.
Further enlightenment is available from the good works of Donald Bartlett and James Steele, two Pulitzer Prize winning authors who made their bones at the Philadelphia Inquirer and Time, Inc., two more hot beds of Leninist activities. Two of their books are America;What Went Wrong, and America,Who Stole the Dream. I also retain a copy of their column in the November 9, 1999 copy of Time, titled What Corporate Welfare Costs You.
Good day to you, sir.
----------------
On 12/31/2002 4:16:25 PM exagony wrote:
The last I checked, I'm paying a higher percentage of my income in taxes than much of the Fortune 500.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Too bad you can't prove it.
----------------
[/blockquote]
------------------------------------------------------------
Easier than pie, sir.
The little fact regarding taxation was called to my attention shortly after that well known duo of Marxists, George Schultz (Sec. of State) and Don Regan (Chief of Staff), called it to the attention of their Commander in Chief, and well known fellow traveler, President Ronald Reagan, for whom I seditiously voted - twice. This was during the ramp-up for simplifying the tax code in the 80's. The pair of Stalinists had the audacity and gall to point out that Reagan's secretary paid more, as a percentage, in taxes than much of corporate America. Reagan professed astonishment; I was outraged. So I began educating myself on this matter.
Two must reads are authored by Kevin Phillips, chief political analyst for the 1968 Republican presidential campaign and, later, assistant to the attorney general. He's also a member of the political panel of the WSJ (sounds like he's a pinko-lefty, too). The books are titled The Politics of Rich and Poor, and Boiling Point.
I refer you to page 111 of Boiling Point.
Sources of Funds for Federal Spending
personal income tax/ payroll tax/ corporate income tax
1950's 42.0% 11.5% 26.9%
1960's 42.0% 18.4% 20.4%
1970's 40.3% 27.7% 13.3%
1980's 38.0% 29.2% 07.7%
I left off estate taxes and borrowing.
So there you have it, sir, and every source cited a Republican.
Further enlightenment is available from the good works of Donald Bartlett and James Steele, two Pulitzer Prize winning authors who made their bones at the Philadelphia Inquirer and Time, Inc., two more hot beds of Leninist activities. Two of their books are America;What Went Wrong, and America,Who Stole the Dream. I also retain a copy of their column in the November 9, 1999 copy of Time, titled What Corporate Welfare Costs You.
Good day to you, sir.
Similar threads
