"US Airways flight attendants spoke up - and face trial"

If this thread has done anything for me it's to make me believe that being linked with the pilots is something that I prefer to keep.

However, if AWA pilots are from a different mindset and we actually do merge this airline, I suggest they gird their loins. Starvation and dehydration await pilots that discount the concerns of flight attendants.
And I tend to believe that a lot will suddenly get "SICK" if they don't feel safe.
[/quote]
all i have to say is what was the bottom line? was there ice? the other;s on the ground find ice and were machines acutally used to deice. Then we can conclude there was ice. why is is cuasing a lawsuri? with all oher issus that we have such as thd cap shooting in the cabin. the fun was out of the holste while landinsomething likd thatshould no have been going on, if the story is correct then he involvrd in hurting/killing us. there should be a disciplinary action and not be allowed to caaryy.dont know the man.Had somone gotten killed we would not be having the same discussion, how would you feel if it happenes again and somone dies? at that point you still want him carrying
 
It is interesting to note that the ground crew in Calgary filled out a report separate of the cabin crew and unbeknownst to them about the de-icing and lack thereof. So, the FA's weren't the only ones concerned. I'm not one to monday morning quarterback, but I think reasonable people can probably agree on the following- clearly there was a fundamental breakdown in CRM. Perhaps if the FO had taken a few minutes to educate Ms. Walker as to why there was no need to de-ice then all parties would have been comfortable with the decision. Maybe it was just hoarfrost on the wings? Could that, to a lay person, appear to be ice? Probably. Maybe. Who knows. None of us were there. BUT, had someone taken 2 minutes to explain using examples where de-icing is not needed they wouldn't be in this mess. None of them. I don't agree with either sides behavior. The situation could have been handled much more professionally on BOTH sides.

Like my mama always says "two wrongs don't make a right".

My prediction is the judge will toss this out on a summary judgement.
 
Based on the seemingly litigious inclinations of the plaintiff and counsel I, for one, expect an appeal.

Does anyone else think he caused himself far more harm pursuing a lawsuit than just being happy that the FAA did not find cause to actually take action against him?
 
From what little I know the plaintiff sued for defamation but they also seemed to suggest somewhere that they were recouping lawyer fees-$21,000 if memory serves-were these fees due to the FAA inquiry?