US Pilots Thread for the week 9/14-9/21.

[ableoneable]

Wow, your arrogance is stupendous. You have not "encapsulated" anything, managing to eat your own tail in the process. Always thought the Mayan pictograph for such was idealized until I saw you actually do it.

It seems there were two other possibilities outside of HP for a merger. Given that, I think HP was on the ropes and US, while possibly suffering downsizing, would certainly have survived. Spare us your silly platitudes and fantastical imaginings that HP "saved" US. Even Warren thinks you are silly.

So now I am arrogant.

A typical response from you Nark, go straight to the personal attack because you can offer nothing else.

You say that my assessment of East's position is false yet you offer absolutely no argument to support your supposition. Grade: F

So in your unbiased opinion USAir would have survived and AWA would have been terminal. Another opinion (shared by few to none outside of the east pilot group) with absolutely zero argument to back up the assertion. Grade: F

I know that anything other than the personnel attack is difficult for you (as evidenced by your multiple trips to the cornfield) but really, do try to offer something of substance instead of both embarrassing yourself and also detracting from what little argument EastUS has.

 

[EastUS]

... but really, do try to offer something of substance instead of both embarrassing yourself and also detracting from what little argument EastUS has.

"but really, do try to offer something of substance.."

I afford you that very opportunity, yet again = "I notice you've nothing to offer as counterpoint to: " Field me ANY argument supporting the fantasy that DOH/LOS integration would have fostered any such BS....???? Test question = Which is the ONLY employee group hereabouts to be mired down in such BS?...and how is it that all other groups integrated decently otherwise? Were all of those people simply far less "special" than your bunch?" Nothing to say there? Whatta' surprise"

You've noted that "There has never been a pilot trade union." OK. If you mean Alpo..we've full agreement. Otherwise? = You've just performed some stylish dance steps around the above observation as to what's both reasonable and practical within the real world, regardless of whether such would/did/does suit your purposes........

 

[ableoneable]

Sounds like a good time to make a start at it to me

I'll evidently not receive any reply from you on: "I notice you've nothing to offer as counterpoint to: " Field me ANY argument supporting the fantasy that DOH/LOS integration would have fostered any such BS....???? Test question = Which is the ONLY employee group hereabouts to be mired down in such BS?...and how is it that all other groups integrated decently otherwise? Were all of those people simply far less "special" than your bunch?" Nothing to say there? Whatta' surprise 😉

I am more than willing to respond.

What exactly do you mean here:

Field me ANY argument supporting the fantasy that DOH/LOS integration would have fostered any such BS....????

What BS is that which would be fostered? I really don't understand what you are trying to say here.

With respect to:

Test question = Which is the ONLY employee group hereabouts to be mired down in such BS?...and how is it that all other groups integrated decently otherwise? Were all of those people simply far less "special" than your bunch?" Nothing to say there? Whatta' surprise 😉

Correct me if I misunderstand but what I think you are saying here is that all other labor groups have been integrated and why is the pilot group unique in not following the integration pattern thus established.

The answer is simple.

The pilot group did not have the same type of merger provisions enshrined in the ALPA by laws as the teamsters or any of the other unions.

The reason the BS, as you call it continues is that the east side decided, after the fact, that arbitration was unfair and arbitrary because the result did not mesh with their world view.

No west pilot thinks that they are, to use your term "special." They do however have a problem with a group who decides to renig on a written agreement because they have the collective attitude of a five year old.

The east pilots worked for a poorly run carrier that did in fact not treat them fairly.

The west pilots feel bad about this but don't feel that they should pay the price for your misfortune.

In essence you are trying to recoup your losses on the backs of west pilots. We are not interested.

 

[ableoneable]

You've noted that "There has never been a pilot trade union." OK. If you mean Alpo..we've full agreement. Otherwise? = You've just performed some stylish dance steps around the above observation as to what's both reasonable and practical within the real world, regardless of whether such would/did/does suit your purposes........

ALPA is of course included but the fact remains that there never has been and will probably never be a pilot trade union.

When an airline is formed they do not go to a trade union to staff their cockpits. They hire off of the streets. Until an airline has to go to a union first there will never be a pilot trade union.

You can fantasize that USAPA is a trade union but wishing it will not make it so.

 

[EastUS]

The answer is simple.

The pilot group did not have the same type of merger provisions enshrined in the ALPA by laws as the teamsters or any of the other unions.

English translation..as best that I can garner from the standard rhetoric = You weren't bound by any reasonable, and generally accepted union principles..so why not just go for whatever you could get away with?. (insert your above reference to five year olds) :blink: Oops!....."Sorry" if things haven't worked out as you wished.

You can fantasize that you've a "Righteous Position" and an "ARMY", but wishing it will not make it so. 😉

 

[ableoneable]

English translation..as best that I can garner from the standard rhetoric = You weren't bound by any reasonable, and generally accepted union principles..so why not just go for whatever you could get away with?. :blink: Oops!....."Sorry" if things haven't worked out as you wished.

You can fantasize that you've a "Righteous Position" and an "ARMY", but wishing it will not make it so. 😉

My English is fairly clear and concise.

You are the one afflicted with a weird form of alliteration that I am at pains to decipher.

If you want to talk about being bound to principles it was the east side that;

A. Never negotiated in good faith but simply said DOHDOHDOH. This position never changed even on the eve of the last arbitration session when the arbitrator admonished them to actually negotiate and not just demand.

B. Entered into arbitration knowing that the outcome could be absolutely anything from DOH to a complete staple of the east list to the bottom. They decided that they did not need to negotiate and therefore threw their lot in with the arbitration process and agreed in writing to abide by the outcome.

C. After the arbitrator made a decision the east side decided to abandon all principles and agreements.

It was the east that decided they were not bound to any principles and simply screamed "my way or no way."

They continue to scream to this day.

You are one of the loudest.

 

[EastUS]

C. After the arbitrator made a decision the east side decided to abandon all principles and agreements.

It was the east that decided they were not bound to any principles and simply screamed "my way or no way."

For what little 'tis worth here: My personal principles have never been much subject to arbitrary/arbitration whims. You clearly feel that such should define "principles". I feel that if anyone needs an arbitrator to define their supposed "principles"...that they have none to start with. We'll clearly disagree.

 

[ableoneable]

For what little 'tis worth here: My personal principles have never been much subject to arbitrary/arbitration whims. You clearly feel that such should define "principles". I feel that if anyone needs an arbitrator to define their supposed "principles"...that they have none to start with. We'll clearly disagree.

It is sometimes almost impossible to determine your point.

The east side gave their word.

They signed an agreement to take a case to an arbitrator.

When they did not like the results they disavowed their written agreements.

You support these actions.

You feel that the west side is the one lacking integrity and adherence to principle because they did not acquiesce to the screams from your side of the table.

Your principles would seem to vary with the desired results. They change to match the circumstances. They are not in fact principles at all.

 

[EastUS]

It is sometimes almost impossible to determine your point.

The east side gave their word.

That's nothing to fret over, as it's often impossible to imagine that you have a point..although with your "clear and concise" english..I'm a bit surprised that the intended-as-obvious so easilly eludes you, especially since you've self-assigned yourself as being competent to "encapsulate" my entire belief structure 😉

Show me anywhere that I gave my Word to the west to eagerly embrace some toxic, Alpoid "process"?, otherwise get off your pathetic little high horse. I've had far more than any tolerable dosage of west "INTEGRITY MATTERS" fantasies.........and your loudest shouters of such have proven to be total jokes as people, within the realm of "INTEGRITY"....

 

[ableoneable]

That's nothing to fret over, as it's often impossible to imagine that you have a point..although with your "clear and concise" english..I'm a bit surprised that the intended-as-obvious so easilly eludes you, especially since you've self-assigned yourself as being competent to "encapsulate" my entire belief structure 😉

Show me anywhere that I gave my Word to the west?, otherwise get off your pathetic little high horse. I've had far more than any tolerable dosage of west "INTEGRITY MATTERS" fantasies.........and your loudest shouters of such have proven to be total jokes as people, within the realm of "INTEGRITY"....

As usual you revert to the stomping of feet instead of addressing any of the arguments.

Individual intititive should mean nothing. If you decided to take a chance and go to JetBlue and are number ten on the list and we merge with you, too bad, DOH at JetBlue is the only acceptable measure of your value. Still waiting.

The east group maintained that career expectations were very important and in fact the list should be crafted in such a way as to guarantee that your most senior furloughee could retire at the top of the A-330 list because it was a birthright. Still Waiting.

The neutral chosen by the east side thought that 90% of the east's arguments were garbage. His only objection was that the furloughees got no credit for LOS at all. Other than that he thought the results were fair. Yet you maintain the arbitration was outrageously unfair but are unable to provide any evidence. Still waiting.

You keep droning on about trade unions. I have pointed out that we are not in one nor likely will we ever be in one yet you keep talking about the principles of trade unionism. Explain how trade union principles can work in an open hiring environment. Still waiting.

You stand by all of the east's decisions in disavowing their written agreements yet you maintain that you adhere to "principle". Your principles appear to be very variable.

You keep screaming that you are a man of integrity yet evidence of said integrity is lacking.

Let me craft your response for you.

You will undoubtedly quote something that NiceLanding said six months ago as proof that he has less integrity and therefore you have some.

Not going to cut it.

 

[EastUS]

You stand by all of the east's decisions in disavowing their written agreements yet you maintain that you adhere to "principle". Your principles appear to be very variable.

You keep screaming that you are a man of integrity yet evidence of said integrity is lacking.

I'll cheerfully, and I think very reasonably, disavow any written/oral/whatever agreements, made by others, that I find to be utterly unprincipled. It astounds me that even that's evidently a difficult concept for you to understand as we discuss notions of principles, and frankly..tells me very loudly and clearly that you've zero understanding of what principles actually are.....at least as I understand them....

Neither Alpo nor nic set my principles for me.......and the west's appear to me to be of the purely opportunistic sort..and thusly, as supposed or even just fantasized "principles"...not even existent.

As for your: "You will undoubtedly quote something that NiceLanding said six months ago as proof that he has less integrity and therefore you have some.
Not going to cut it." Unbelievably generous on your part..to imagine that I'd ever have the temerity to measure myself against the likes of you two, within any aspects of "INTEGRITY". 😉

 

[ableoneable]

I'll cheerfully, and I think very reasonably, disavow any written/oral/whatever agreements, made by others, that I find to be utterly unprincipled. It astounds me that even that's evidently a difficult concept for you to understand as we discuss notions of principles, and frankly..tells me very loudly and clearly that you've zero understanding of what principles actually are.....at least as I understand them....

Neither Alpoounor nic set my principles for me.......

You managed to respond to one point out of six. Not bad.

The point is the east side walked away from a written agreement and because this benifits you personally you are perfectly willing to alter your "principles" and support their decision.

You make yourself feel slightly better about this by saying that you disagreed with how they were running things so you are not bound by any of their agreements anyway. Nice try but pretty weak.

I would find your defense of your principles slightly more persuasive if you thought that it was wrong of the east ALPA unit to try and walk away from their written agreements but you do not. You support them running from their responsibilities. This is somewhat different than saying that you did not agree with any of their positions and are therefore not bound to them.

You then make a JIANT leap and pronounce that it is in fact the west side that lacks integrity. This sweeping verdict is based on....................the anonymous postings of three guys on a webboard.

It is you who are confused about terms like; honesty, integrity and principles.

I am sure that you think that you are a man of principle. Probably everyone who has acted dishonorably believed in their own mind that they were straightforward men of honor.

 

[EastUS]

The point is the east side walked away from a written agreement and because this benifits you personally you are perfectly willing to alter your "principles" and support their decision.

I am sure that you think that you are a man of principle. Probably everyone who has acted dishonorably believed in their own mind that they were straightforward men of honor.

1) Nic would do nothing to me personally. Here's a point that you seem utterly incapable of understanding, and your posting proves as much quite handilly = Not ALL of us live in the "IT's ALL about MEEE!!" world that you so easilly and automatically project at a moment's notice, and one must fairly assume colors the bulk of your perceptions.

2) No argument whatsoever. Just take a good look at the entire west "Righteous Position" = "I'm really and truly "Special" ...just ask me"...I'm "worth" 20+ years of another pilot's life/etc

 

[ableoneable]

1) Nic would do nothing to me personally. Here's a point that you seem utterly incapable of understanding, and your posting proves as much quite handilly = Not ALL of us live in the "IT's ALL about MEEE!!" world that you so easilly and automatically project at a moment's notice, and one must fairly assume colors the bulk of your perceptions.

2) No argument whatsoever. Just take a good look at the entire west "Righteous Position" = "I'm really and truly "Special" ...just ask me"...I'm "worth" 20+ years of another pilot's life/etc

Still no response to the other six points. Pretty standard stuff for you.

You have still managed to avoid the meat of the issue.

The east ALPA unit signed an agreement and walked away from said agreement. You cheer their decision.

You maintain that they don't speak for you yet you agree with the totality of their position. You think that they handled the negotiations leading up to the arbitration correctly yet you still say; "They don't speak for me and I am not beholden to any of their agreements, though in truth I wholeheartedly agree with all of their positions on this issue." You don't see the hypocrisy?

With respect to

2) No argument whatsoever. Just take a good look at the entire west "Righteous Position" = "I'm really and truly "Special" ...just ask me"...I'm "worth" 20+ years of another pilot's life/etc

I asked;
"Individual intititive should mean nothing. If you decided to take a chance and go to JetBlue and are number ten on the list and we merge with you, too bad, DOH at JetBlue is the only acceptable measure of your value. Still waiting."

Your response: More ranting that this is just the west saying that the are "special"

I have heard you scream this countless times yet whenever you are faced with a scenario like the JetBlue one I posed you hide your head in the sand and wait for the original question to be forgotten so that you can respond with your usual mix of; SPECIAL, IT'S ABOUT MEEEE and various eye rolls and sighs.

Very persuasive.

So mister man of honor, how about addressing the original question for once?

West pilots don't think we are special but we are not going to pay for your misfortune.

Address the JetBlue scenario as it pertains to your DOH/LOS is the only way to go or shut up.

 

[EastUS]

You have still managed to avoid the meat of the issue.

OK..that's the supposed "meat"? Fair enough then.

"The east ALPA unit signed an agreement and walked away from said agreement. You cheer their decision." I don't care in the slightest what Alpa did there, or ever does anywhere else...Is that much at all clear? If you've taken time to "listen"..rather than idiotically pretend to know what my thoughts were/are...you would know that.

"I asked;
"Individual intititive should mean nothing. If you decided to take a chance and go to JetBlue and are number ten on the list and we merge with you, too bad, DOH at JetBlue is the only acceptable measure of your value. Still waiting." Yes. DOH and time worked is just exactly that. I gave up time worked when resigning from a previous company, and do not believe myself entitled to such as a result. A true, national seniority list, predicated on honest union principles, would be much to be desired, but hasn't been, nor likely will be established. With that said; I expect any and all to keep their time worked, whenever any merger/combination occurs. Personal initiative's one thing. uncontrolled events are another.

"Your response: More ranting that this is just the west saying that the are "special" Can't much help that...you folks make such an exceptionally vocal case for just exactly that 😉 the only other possible, slight variations are: "We saved you!!"..and/or "We won the lottery!!" 😉 Pretty much the same BS, regardless of how you wish to flavor it....

"West pilots don't think we are special but we are not going to pay for your misfortune." Part one = Total BS. Part two = No one's asking you to do so. You're the one's seeking to take east work, not the reverse.