What's new

Single agent workforce makes debut

Pilot, I somewhat disagree. To me it is a job. The 57% are simply the over 55 gang (Geralization, I know there are exceptions)who throw everyone else under the bus to stay in the left seat that they have been in for 20 years. They are big time scared of change, have very little self confidence or their EGO requires the left seat and they would do anything and I mean anything, to stay there. I still see them, even today whith all we know and all that has happened to us, they still operate in the least safe manner. They would, today, take another paycut. I am sure they would take another 50% as long as they could stay in the left seat. They are easily identifiable if you look around. They still wear certain items that are no longer required by the company, but their ego requires they wear them. It is my personal opinion that the company knows this, that is why we have had very little real progress on the combined contract. Sorry I am so harsh, but it is time to get tough with our own. In times past, ball bats would have been used to ensure the rank and file were in line. Now all we can do is attempt to humiliate them.

You got everything correct except for your second sentence.

It is not just a "job". That is what managment wants you to believe. You know what it took to get there. You know what it takes to stay there. You know the responsibility you hold and what happens if you make a mistake.

The education, training, physicals, checkrides, and respsonsibilities etc..... make it much more than a job. Do not sell the profession short my friend. A job is what they (both management and the GAG) are trying to turn it into. It is up to us to try to stop that agenda.

Your words, nor mine, are not harsh. They are the truth. Sometimes the truth is harsh.

pilot
 
You got everything correct except for your second sentence.

It is not just a "job". That is what managment wants you to believe. You know what it took to get there. You know what it takes to stay there. You know the responsibility you hold and what happens if you make a mistake.

The education, training, physicals, checkrides, and respsonsibilities etc..... make it much more than a job. Do not sell the profession short my friend. A job is what they (both management and the GAG) are trying to turn it into. It is up to us to try to stop that agenda.

Your words, nor mine, are not harsh. They are the truth. Sometimes the truth is harsh.

pilot

Aren't you part of the fly till you die crowd?
 
I could probably paper my office with PM's (if I'd bothered to save them) stating you're the most hated man at the airline and that no one respects you, and the vast majority disregard your thoughts.
Actually I'm looking forward to meeting him and introducing myself on one of his flights in the very near future.....
 
Aren't you part of the fly till you die crowd?

Nope.

I'm going to go before my 60th. Either 57 or 56 depending on a few factors not totally in my control.

I fully supported the age 60 rule. Right up to the point where the pension disappeared. At that time it became very apparent to me that promises not kept would cause undue hardship on guys who didn't plan on not having a pension. Or medical benefits.

You can argue all day long about those guys making all that money and setting themselves up with or without the pension. Some of us did. Most of us didn't. Some of us sat up and took notice when Braniff went belly up. Most ignored it.

When the PBGC grants full retirement benefits at age 60 and when Social Security and Medicaire grant full benefits at age 60 I might change my mind.

Until then each and every pilot should have the option of going to 65. Especially in light of the ICAO ruling of allowing foreign pilots to fly in the USA up to that age.

pilot
 
Nope.

I'm going to go before my 60th. Either 57 or 56 depending on a few factors not totally in my control.

I fully supported the age 60 rule. Right up to the point where the pension disappeared. At that time it became very apparent to me that promises not kept would cause undue hardship on guys who didn't plan on not having a pension. Or medical benefits.

You can argue all day long about those guys making all that money and setting themselves up with or without the pension. Some of us did. Most of us didn't. Some of us sat up and took notice when Braniff went belly up. Most ignored it.

When the PBGC grants full retirement benefits at age 60 and when Social Security and Medicaire grant full benefits at age 60 I might change my mind.

Until then each and every pilot should have the option of going to 65. Especially in light of the ICAO ruling of allowing foreign pilots to fly in the USA up to that age.

pilot

Sounds like fly till you die to me. How would you feel about over sixty going back to the right seat?
 
Like I said I'm not going to be here. If that is the way the union decides the issue so be it. Keeping in mind you will be going to the right seat if you decide to stay after 60. And I doubt very much most guys will drop dead at age 65. So fly till you die has a nice ring to it but it is disengenuous at best. And a shot at fellow pilots who have a different point of view than your own.

Based on your comments you still support the age 60 rule. Refute my arguments for going past age 60. I'm anxious to here arguments that are intellectual and not emotional.

pilot
 
Like I said I'm not going to be here. If that is the way the union decides the issue so be it. Keeping in mind you will be going to the right seat if you decide to stay after 60. And I doubt very much most guys will drop dead at age 65. So fly till you die has a nice ring to it but it is disengenuous at best. And a shot at fellow pilots who have a different point of view than your own.

Based on your comments you still support the age 60 rule. Refute my arguments for going past age 60. I'm anxious to here arguments that are intellectual and not emotional.

pilot

Answer my question first. Are you for or against over sixty going back to the right seat? Please explain your reasoning either way.
 
Answer my question first. Are you for or against over sixty going back to the right seat? Please explain your reasoning either way.

I'm not sure if you were around in the 727 days. I had "retread" engineers who I flew copilot for when they were Captains and the situation worked out very well.

So I would not have a problem with if the rule were changed and anyone over 65 could only fly in the right seat.

But that is highly unlikely to happen based on the ICAO ruling.

So you tell me your opposition to changing the rule.

pilot
 
For G--'s sake, how do you start a thread about the airline being one company now east and west to "fly till you die"? Too funny. Well just answering the first thread from the pilot who decided he would take on Piney Bob. You must be almost "60", becoming senile and off your rocker!
 
Outstanding point about the jellyfish stinging you and trying to protect itself when threatened.

I hereby withdraw the jellyfish comparison.

But I think I might go with amoeba. Defined as follows:

Any of a large genus (Amoeba) of naked rhizopod protozoans with lobed and never anastomosing pseudopodia, without permanent organelles or supporting structures, and of wide distribution in fresh and salt water and moist terrestrial environments ;

Now that definition fits him to a T.

But seriously, guys like him, and there are more than just a few, have allowed a profession to flounder because of their fear and panic.

But I will sum it up fairly simply. His group won't risk company liquidation to stand up tall and fight for a proud profession. My group will.

As we speak their "another day" is upon us. And they still won't fight. Witness his mouthpiece posts on this website. Then talk to the guys he flys with. It's truly pathetic.

pilot

The above post and the one prior to it are so funny i almost think they should get their own thread! hahahahahahaha :lol: :lol: :lol:
 

Latest posts

Back
Top