US Pilots Labor Discussion

[Move2CLT]

Is there a third party provision that I am not aware of?

You're obviously not aware of anything. <_<

 

[EastUS1]

Did you almost pass out writing such a short post?

Little effort was required. All I found needed, in order to better "play to the gallery"= yourself and your supporters, was to imagine myself the tragic victim of a massive head injury.....

 

[luvthe9]

Yawn.

Once again, all blah and nothing more.

Enjoy your day as well.

Way to go Move2, you are closing in on that windbag BB in one year with what took him almost a decade! 4000 plus posts in just months. Think we believe you fly?

 

[Move2CLT]

Hey welcome, "Traitor" how you and the Chipster doing today?

Moving in the right direction luv. Now throw in a linking verb and I'll pass you.

 

[Move2CLT]

Little effort was required. All I found needed, in order to better "play to the gallery"= yourself and your supporters, was to imagine myself the tragic victim of a massive head injury.....

Imagination is not necessary East as most of us believe you have already experienced numerous head injuries.

Pretending to be smart by using a thesaurus to write your posts is a telltale sign.

 

[Move2CLT]

Way to go Move2, you are closing in on that windbag BB in one year with what took him almost a decade! 4000 plus posts in just months. Think we believe you fly?

Ahhh, there it is. Explain it away luv. If you can't beat the facts, attack something else.

If you guys wouldn't give me so much to work with then I wouldn't have to post so much. And it's quite obvious alot of you easties agree with me as I'm approaching 4300 +s. What do you think luv?

Your BS alone is good for at least 200 replies minimum.

You guys need help and I'm here giving it to you no matter how many posts it takes. A simple "thanks" would suffice.

 

[traderjake]

Hey welcome, "Traitor" how you and the Chipster doing today?

Hey, it's the president of my fan club.

Have you had any more discussions about my popularity?

 

[EastUS1]

Imagination is not necessary East as most of us believe you have already experienced numerous head injuries.

Pretending to be smart by using a thesaurus...

1) I can certainly understand that. I've wondered lately myself, as I'm again wasting irreplaceable time "here", with such as yourself.
2) Pretty "big word" for your crowd...one must assume you to be demonstrating the ole' saurus approach there...

Still waiting on that way-cool-dudeT shirt....Sigh!

 

[EastUS1]

So, you are actually comparing someone with six years of service with a "new hire" who was working, on the property, serving the company; someone with a future - with someone out of a job with NO HOPE of returning to said company on the brink of liquidation.

My example was that of 16+ years of continuous service, ie working, but no matter. Let's take your 6 years of service notion. You forward that, based upon the supposed likelihood of an entity folding, that said years of service should be disregarded in favor of one with ZERO years flown....entirely based upon a particular moment in time, and, as is always the case, a merely fantasized/supposed/maybe-maybe not future?....Sigh!...That's hardly representative of any cohesive moral construct, and represents only the feeble "justification" of a rank opportunist.

Allow me to simplify the original question into it's most basic, essential form: What MORAL basis exists for placing any person, with far less years worked within the same class and craft, as "senior" to any other with more years of service performed? I'd ask you note that this is not a question inherently involving the AWA vs US insanity, but one addressing moral principles..or lack thereof....so: should you cite Nic as any "moral basis"...you'll perhaps have to excuse the gales of ensuing laughter.

 

[cleardirect]

My example was that of 16+ years of continuous service, ie working, but no matter. Let's take your 6 years of service notion. You forward that, based upon the supposed likelihood of an entity folding, that said years of service should be disregarded in favor of one with ZERO years flown....entirely based upon a particular moment in time, and, as is always the case, a merely fantasized/supposed/maybe-maybe not future?....Sigh!...That's hardly representative of any cohesive moral construct, and represents only the feeble "justification" of a rank opportunist.

Allow me to simplify the original question into it's most basic, essential form: What MORAL basis exists for placing any person, with far less years worked within the same class and craft, as "senior" to any other with more years of service performed? I'd ask you note that this is not a question inherently involving the AWA vs US insanity, but one addressing moral principles..or lack thereof....so: should you cite Nic as any "moral basis"...you'll perhaps have to excuse the gales of ensuing laughter.

You guys kill me. You want to equate morality with a seniority list. Seniority lists are things of contract, legal or negotiation. Nothing moral or immoral about them. If have looked and looked at the Nicolau list and I can not find a DOH or LOS next to any name on that list. What I see is a list of names in order of SENIORITY.

Now living up to your agreements. That is a moral question. Is it moral to falsely sue someone? Is it moral to use the appeal board to void an election because you don't like the results?

Unless you are trying to say that Nicolau and all of the other arbitrators and the law (M/B) that disagree with using LOS or DOH as being immoral. Are you calling George Nicolau immoral?

 

[EastUS1]

You guys kill me. You want to equate morality with a seniority list.

..Words just fail me here....Ummm...can I just have that "Integrity Matters" T shirt now? 😉

Perhaps I should offer this a few moments more. "Seniority lists are things of contract, legal or negotiation. Nothing moral or immoral about them." So...all's fair, or at least without any morality at issue, within all products of "legal or negotiation" OK...ummm...Help me out with this; by your "logic"; Would not contesting such, by any disagreeable party, be equally, merely an issue of "legal or negotiation"?...and thus have "Nothing moral or immoral" involved?

Oh!..I see you've "covered" that obvious notion. = "Now living up to your agreements. That is a moral question."...How very convenient indeed. 😉

Sigh!...I'll just never get that T shirt.....aw nuts...

 

[Move2CLT]

What MORAL basis exists for placing any person, with far less years worked within the same class and craft, as "senior" to any other with more years of service performed?

Relative seniority and the fact that the continuous service was for an airline that no longer exists.

Do you not get the memo on the merger?

 

[Move2CLT]

..Words just fail me here....Ummm...can I just have that "Integrity Matters" T shirt now? 😉

Did you want it in the same color as those silly lanyards USAPA passed around to show everyone how tough you were?

 

[jetjok1]

No, they're just routes with higher yields that cover our higher crew costs.

Why? Do you think we don't get paid more than you do? I can show you our rates.

I'm curious as to where this 24% number came from. Can you post the source?

I know what you make. The percentage is plastered all over these boards. Really doesn't matter what the percentage is if you understand the point I'm making

 

[cleardirect]

..Words just fail me here....Ummm...can I just have that "Integrity Matters" T shirt now? 😉

Try to understand the entire post.

Seniority lists are not moral or immoral.

Peoples actions are. The east action rejecting arbitration is immoral. If you east pilots had integrity we would not be where we are today. You wearing an integrity matters shirt would burn like sunlight on a vampire.