Where is the Answer?

cavalier

Veteran
Aug 28, 2002
2,409
1
www.usaviation.com
[P] I find it peculiar that several people have asked the question directed to the negative voters for a rational reason their decision. People like Uinvester/Jack, geo1004 a loyal passenger and others along with myself have asked this question. Not one single negative voter has been able to give an intelligent answer as to how a negative response to the company will help or solve anything. All you read is fury, rage, frustration, mistrust, things management has done wrong and what they should do right and why, management being called stupid and even worse by some hateful people. Such things as: They are bluffing, chapter 7 will not happen because they have come too far. Voting negative will bring them back to the table for fairer deals. They will come back for more again anyway. If war breaks out, severance is lost, fleet is reduced, everyone loses. I don’t care one way or another, so I am a negative. With the pension fund problems, it doesn’t matter so negative it is. And the never ending Dave & Dave are not to be trusted, I simply don’t believe them. The facts have not even been presented to the IAM members, yet there are people who seem to think they have all the answers beforehand. The people who claim not to care anymore care enough to post on here and read what is posted. People are posting with 30 years service trying to explain their negative vote, they can’t seem to grasp the real gravity of this company’s dire straights. After 30 years it seems just impossible to them. [/P]
[P] Now, when you sit back and look at these rationalizations, not one of them makes any sense at all. Every one of them is based on raw emotion and fantasies from a paranoid imagination. The reasons I read are not rational when you look at what is involved and who is involved. >From big money people to the government and yet we see people calling them liars, stupid and lacking integrity. These very powerful people have clearly stated the hard cold facts, we have already seen tons of people hitting the streets every day, yet people still think it’s all a bluff, a big game. Not one single rational answer has been brought forth as to why a negative vote will solve this problem, a problem so big that very powerful people have been involved along with the government to solve it. You can read this while getting red in the face and have the arteries in your neck bulged out, but the facts are still as they are, hard and cold[/P]
 

delldude

Veteran
Oct 29, 2002
28,208
5,878
Downrange
www.youtube.com
people who lead with their head usually get popped in the mug.
 

mlt

Senior
Dec 2, 2002
291
0
www.usaviation.com
Cavalier,[BR]I assume you are referring to me when you cite people who question our corporate leaders' integrity. I would gladly list my reasons, however the moderator will instantly delete my post. Am I thinking and writing on this board with emotion? You better believe I am! Do I know the answer to solving this mess? NO, I do not. How will I vote? I don't know. The emotional side of me says a 'no' vote is an in your face message. The rational side of me says a 'no' vote will disrupt the lives of many.[BR][BR]I believe you often refernce the Bible in your posts, and believe me I am by far not a Bible scholar; however, to the best of my memory are we not expected to stand up against injustice? Before you come back with how will standing up to injustice solve this situation, I have no idea; just venting.[BR][BR]I am currently reading a book that was published a few years ago regarding the scandals of President Clinton's administration, "The Death of Outrage". My perception so far is that when one sacrifices values and integrity the end game is lost.[BR][BR]Peace,
 

Atlantic

Senior
Sep 2, 2002
499
0
Delta,
ALPA chose to shoot itself in the foot, not in the head.
You can go north or south. How about putting the cart befor the horse.
What say you?
 

deltawatch

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
887
0
www.usaviation.com
If they close the doors because the CWA keeps language that allows them to work all mainline flights instead of doing an across the board member pay cut, the company leaders and ALPA are ignorant. I’m voting no believing they are not, but like you keep saying maybe they are. And maybe I’m giving them credit for to much common sense.
 

deltawatch

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
887
0
www.usaviation.com
What I'm saying is that allowing the CWA to have language that keeps us working all mainline flights will cost the company maybe a million a year. After all they have said only a few cities will be effected, if you believe that???

Then we take a pay cut to lets say $18.50 an hour and they have their money. I bet a yes vote would follow. We all keep working and paying our bills. You keep your big pension and we retire on social security as planned.
 

1ab

Advanced
Aug 21, 2002
147
0
Is it possible, since U have all these financing agreed upon by the DIP and now GE that they can close the company down and restart it with new name and rehire everybody at wages they want to pay with no unions.
 

diogenes

Veteran
Aug 22, 2002
2,515
0
[blockquote]
----------------
On 1/5/2003 12:25:39 PM cavalier wrote:


I find it peculiar that several people have asked the question directed to the negative voters for a rational reason their decision. People like Uinvester/Jack, geo1004 a loyal passenger and others along with myself have asked this question. Not one single negative voter has been able to give an intelligent answer as to how a negative response to the company will help or solve anything. All you read is fury, rage, frustration, mistrust, things management has done wrong and what they should do right and why, management being called stupid and even worse by some hateful people. Such things as: They are bluffing, chapter 7 will not happen because they have come too far. Voting negative will bring them back to the table for fairer deals. They will come back for more again anyway. If war breaks out, severance is lost, fleet is reduced, everyone loses. I don’t care one way or another, so I am a negative. With the pension fund problems, it doesn’t matter so negative it is. And the never ending Dave & Dave are not to be trusted, I simply don’t believe them. The facts have not even been presented to the IAM members, yet there are people who seem to think they have all the answers beforehand. The people who claim not to care anymore care enough to post on here and read what is posted. People are posting with 30 years service trying to explain their negative vote, they can’t seem to grasp the real gravity of this company’s dire straights. After 30 years it seems just impossible to them. [/P]


Now, when you sit back and look at these rationalizations, not one of them makes any sense at all. Every one of them is based on raw emotion and fantasies from a paranoid imagination. The reasons I read are not rational when you look at what is involved and who is involved. From big money people to the government and yet we see people calling them liars, stupid and lacking integrity. These very powerful people have clearly stated the hard cold facts, we have already seen tons of people hitting the streets every day, yet people still think it’s all a bluff, a big game. Not one single rational answer has been brought forth as to why a negative vote will solve this problem, a problem so big that very powerful people have been involved along with the government to solve it. You can read this while getting red in the face and have the arteries in your neck bulged out, but the facts are still as they are, hard and cold[/P]
----------------
[/blockquote]
------------------------------------------------------------

Cav,

Read your post, blood pressure doing just fine!

From my reading of the various group's concession proposals (with the sole exception of ALPA's; their deal is double classified top secret [img src='http://www.usaviation.com/idealbb/images/smilies/7.gif'] ) everybody except agents KNOWS what they're getting into with this vote. If I were ALPA, IAM mech or AFA, I'd vote yes.

Agents, to date, do not KNOW what they're getting into. Expecting that information is simple justice. There have been soothing noises from various quadrants that there won't be too much disruption amongst the agent ranks, but no cold hard facts. It seems the latest selling point implies "we're only going to screw a few little stations" - presumably, to encourage the larger stations to throw their brethren overboard.

Here's the rub. Between fleet and CWA, we have to hit a $25 mil bogey number annually. Where are those savings coming from? From the proposals, it is NOT coming from wage cuts, pension (ha!) adjustments, etc. The proposals have added MDA/express language for a reason, and, absent the further revelation of facts, one can only conclude that is where the savings are coming from. I am perfectly willing to be proven wrong in this matter.

I also suspect a great deal of the gnashing of teeth is akin to the feudal lords looking in chagrin over their battlements as the peasants approach with torches and pitchforks. It is never wise to back someone in a corner. For every one person who will still make a rational decision under such duress, 100 are created who will not.

I want this company to succeed and do well - I have worked hard these 20 years to make it so. But I am unwilling to get U out of bankruptcy by putting me in it.

When the time comes, I will make a rational decision, based on the facts in hand. To date, there is insufficient information.

Speculation cannot exist in the presence of facts.
 

gilbertguy

Senior
Aug 29, 2002
368
0
[blockquote]
----------------
On 1/5/2003 4:26:35 PM deltawatch wrote:

What I'm saying is that allowing the CWA to have language that keeps us working all mainline flights will cost the company maybe a million a year. After all they have said only a few cities will be effected, if you believe that???

Then we take a pay cut to lets say $18.50 an hour and they have their money. I bet a yes vote would follow. We all keep working and paying our bills. You keep your big pension and we retire on social security as planned.

The point is....the company doesn't want to pay you $18.50 hr, or $13.01 hr.....or for your health plan, or your vacation...you see where this is heading.....
14.gif']
 

autofixer

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
1,804
241
www.usaviation.com
I have told this story before and I'll tell it again. I know a small businessman who pays his employees $10 per hour. He was asked,"Why do you pay your employees so little?" His answer, "Because I can."

--INFO ONLY--
 

networking

Advanced
Sep 1, 2002
120
0
[P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][FONT face="Arial Black"][/FONT][BR]----------------[BR]On 1/5/2003 9:32:29 PM autofixer wrote:
[P]I have told this story before and I'll tell it again. I know a small businessman who pays his employees $10 per hour. He was asked,"Why do you pay your employees so little?" His answer, "Because I can." [BR][BR]--INFO ONLY-- [/P]----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE]
[P][/P][FONT size=3]And if we vote yes.....they will (with our own approval)[/FONT]