blue collar
Veteran
- Mar 17, 2008
- 1,241
- 901
It would be nice to have a board where people could open a second account to boost their negative rating...
Disappointed with DL 176 ATL DUB Jan 22, 2103
- Thread starter gizmo_sc
- Start date
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #33
You might want to ask yourself who started w/ comments claiming that I was ready to turn in the OP followed by support from your sidekick talking about bringing on the pitchforks.
Nowhere did I or anyone else except you two believe that I wanted to turn in the OP... in fact, I specifically said that my intention was to warn those who think it is acceptable to post any type of disparaging remark about a non-rev experience, and again, that has nothing to do w/ DL.
If I want to turn in people, I know EXACTLY where to go and who to start with.
If all you can do is turn every post into an opportunity to rehash your dissatisfaction w/ DL's resolution of the labor situation, then you probably should find another place to post. The readers of one aviation website have already told PMNW employees they no longer want to hear their complaints and jaded posts against DL.
The representation process for more than a half dozen elections was changed to the benefit of organized labor and yet labor lost every one of the representation elections for the largest labor groups of the combined DL/NW.
Yet some here can't seem to grasp the concept that they do not represent sufficient numbers to change the outcome of the representation elections.
The elections are over and the merger is done. We're not interested in seeing every discussion about DL turned into yet one more opportunity to bash the company that has won over its own employees who want nothing to do with the fractious, contentious labor relations that marked NW and continue to be emblematic of much of the rest of the airline industry.
You better believe WT also uses the spectator user name to cancel the negative votes of those who can't win the argument using what is posted on the forum so they resorted to using negative votes... one person who has participated in this thread racked up hundreds of negative votes on every post I entered on this forum, regardless of the topic.
Those who want to make a mockery of the post voting system should not be surprised if I do the very same thing.
And they should have absolutely no doubts about when the call for pitchforks really does take place.
- Banned
- #34
WT,
Glenn mentioned no names.
Funny thing is No One's name is mentioned to who would report this to Delta, do you have a guilty conscious WT?
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #35
Q's comment was anything but veiled.
"You need to be aware that there are those here that will go to any length to silence critique of Delta" followed by a quote from me.
Not veiled at all.
I'm not stupid and neither are they....quite the contrary. We both know exactly what each other is talking about.
K and Q - and you for a little good measure - want to come on here and trash people and organizations and then act surprised when someone actually calls them out for their behavior - at the same time they have the nerve to call my behavior childish.
"You need to be aware that there are those here that will go to any length to silence critique of Delta" followed by a quote from me.
Not veiled at all.
I'm not stupid and neither are they....quite the contrary. We both know exactly what each other is talking about.
K and Q - and you for a little good measure - want to come on here and trash people and organizations and then act surprised when someone actually calls them out for their behavior - at the same time they have the nerve to call my behavior childish.
Kev3188
Veteran
... except that none of that occured, except maybe in your mind.
No one brought up labor, except you.
BTW, is that "one aviation site" this one, or the one you're banned from?
Either way, you sure as hell don't speak for either every poster on this site, nor every DL employee. Be careful how you use words like "we" and "us."
No one has "bashed" DL, either. This was a actually pretty benign thread until you decided it was the opening you'd been waiting for try and make it something else. The fact that people aren't letting you change the conversation to suit your needs is clearly affecting you.
You are looking for a conflict that simply doesn't exist, but like I said earlier, do whatcha like.
Just know that your shadow boxing is making you look incredibly silly, and not a little over sensitive.
I will say it's nice to see the real WT come through, though. All that repression and "keeping up appearances" day after day must be hard.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #37
that would be a.net...
a little deflection to attempt to obscure the fact that PMNW people were told their whining about the merger's outcome is no longer welcome? Whether I post on that site or not doesn't change the fact that your message is no longer welcome there.
I didn't say I represent the views of DL employees but I do read the papers and can cite dozens of articles about the loss that labor suffered when the vote tallies were released.
The DL employees spoke - and it is the data from the elections that I cite as speaking for them.
I repress nothing, BTW. Which is probably why we have butted heads continually. I don't pull punches and I don't play the passive aggressive games which you seem like to accuse me of - while you play the very same games.
I'm aggressive... nothing passive about it. My backbone is fully intact and functioning as intended.
I'm not looking for a fight - but I sure am not running from one either. And I don't take on causes that I'm not willing to fight for.
Just tell us - and we can be done w/ this thread - is it permissible under DL policy for a pass rider using any DL issued pass benefits to share a bad non-rev experience with anyone other than the employee who then should forward it to the appropriate parties within DL?
And has or has not DL provided an online form for DL employees to provide feedback on their travel experiences for appropriate handling WITHIN Delta?
Simple questions.
When you and Q - who have rights to use DL benefits - can properly answer that question, then I will rest my case on this thread - and it will become perfectly clear why Baba, Josh (who doesn't even have DL benefits) and I all recognize that the OP was inappropriate based on DL's policies.
a little deflection to attempt to obscure the fact that PMNW people were told their whining about the merger's outcome is no longer welcome? Whether I post on that site or not doesn't change the fact that your message is no longer welcome there.
I didn't say I represent the views of DL employees but I do read the papers and can cite dozens of articles about the loss that labor suffered when the vote tallies were released.
The DL employees spoke - and it is the data from the elections that I cite as speaking for them.
I repress nothing, BTW. Which is probably why we have butted heads continually. I don't pull punches and I don't play the passive aggressive games which you seem like to accuse me of - while you play the very same games.
I'm aggressive... nothing passive about it. My backbone is fully intact and functioning as intended.
I'm not looking for a fight - but I sure am not running from one either. And I don't take on causes that I'm not willing to fight for.
Just tell us - and we can be done w/ this thread - is it permissible under DL policy for a pass rider using any DL issued pass benefits to share a bad non-rev experience with anyone other than the employee who then should forward it to the appropriate parties within DL?
And has or has not DL provided an online form for DL employees to provide feedback on their travel experiences for appropriate handling WITHIN Delta?
Simple questions.
When you and Q - who have rights to use DL benefits - can properly answer that question, then I will rest my case on this thread - and it will become perfectly clear why Baba, Josh (who doesn't even have DL benefits) and I all recognize that the OP was inappropriate based on DL's policies.
Kev3188
Veteran
Sure thing, tough guy.
Right after you explain your insistence on bringing labor into this thread-and it's relevance- and where at any point DL was bashed by Q, myself, or anyone else.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #39
the relevance has already been noted and corresponds to the established patterns between participants of this discussion regarding labor issues......
once again, what is the established procedure for DL employees and all of their pass riders to communicate travel issues w/ DL?
And additionally, please name one airline that allows its employees or other airline employees or those using interline pass benefits on it to publicly air their bad experiences.
Q did at least ask the question what type of pass benefit this person was using before he went into his diatribe about people trying to silence any criticism of DL.
once again, what is the established procedure for DL employees and all of their pass riders to communicate travel issues w/ DL?
And additionally, please name one airline that allows its employees or other airline employees or those using interline pass benefits on it to publicly air their bad experiences.
Q did at least ask the question what type of pass benefit this person was using before he went into his diatribe about people trying to silence any criticism of DL.
Kev3188
Veteran
Translation: there is no direct relevance here, other than to sate your compulsion to argue.
He sure did, unlike you who assumed it was a buddy pass. My $$$ is still on OAL travel...
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #41
You very well may be right... but then let me know which airline would have allowed its own employees to complain about their own service in a public forum.
The answers to the questions about DL pass policies are_______________________________?
You're smart, K. I've said that a million times and will say it again. But you have a mighty hard time admitting that someone else is right and you might be wrong.
The issue that was laid out early on was whether it was permissible for a non-rev to discuss bad pass experiences in a public forum. Long before pitchforks, threats of outings, and the injection of labor into the discussion.
Is it possible you can just admit that is the issue which several people commented on long before you entered the conversation?
Kev3188
Veteran
No, because it wasn't the issue that "several" (which really means 3) people brought up before I posted. Only you had.
And even if it were, it offers no rational reason for your insistence on bringing labor relations up, either.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #43
K,
Please go back and look at the first posts in this thread by Josh and Baba.... I don't think it can be denied that they raised the issue of non-revs speaking about their bad non-rev experiences.
You clearly did not like the reason I have given several times for why I included labor in the discussion - but you apparently don't agree w/ my logic or don't want to see the connection, even if you do agree w/ the logic.
It might appear from other posts that you are ready to move past the labor issues and have accepted that DL has been willing to buy labor peace, and has the finances to be able to do so. I have often said that I see little difference in the way DL operates now - and historically did - and how WN has operated. It shouldn't be surprising that for years, DL had the best DOT consumer complaint ratio in the industry but lost it to WN who hasn't let go of it for years and years. It's a lot easier to do any job when you are well paid- andthat of course is a relative term.
However, I genuinely do apologize if I turned this thread into another argument about labor when it appears that is not what you want.
We have debated the issue for so long that it has been an underlying current in our discussions - but perhaps it is I who has kept it up front - and perhaps as you say to feed conflict.
I would note that I found it equally contributing to conflict to be singled out by Q as desiring to rat out anyone since there is no evidence in what I wrote to support that is what I have done or would do - on this issue or any other. The flames were further flamed by the comments about pitchforks. My question to you and Q would be how you thought that would create a healthy dialogue and what kind of reaction you thought your comments would elicit.
What does seem apparent is that we have fffigured out after years and years of debate to know how exactly how to push each other's buttons and how to elicit a response - which feeds into our common intense desire to win the argument and often without regard to whether we bloody the other in the process.
Although Q hasn't been involved in our debates near as long as you you and I have, he has picked up very quickly had to do the very same thing.
We can all do better. I have no doubt that all of us are very good people deep to the core.
The forum will be a better place for all of us if we (collective) dial down the rhetoric and attempt to foster a more postiive environment for the exchange of ideas.
Of course all of this doesn't mean that other issues aren't in play in the original thread - and I don't think I ever said that the issue of non-rev protocol or service is the only issue that can be discussed.... just that non-revs' right to complain means that non-rev protocol cannot be avoided.
You felt that you thought there were service issues that should be addressed. Please feel free to comment on them and address them if you would like.
Please go back and look at the first posts in this thread by Josh and Baba.... I don't think it can be denied that they raised the issue of non-revs speaking about their bad non-rev experiences.
You clearly did not like the reason I have given several times for why I included labor in the discussion - but you apparently don't agree w/ my logic or don't want to see the connection, even if you do agree w/ the logic.
It might appear from other posts that you are ready to move past the labor issues and have accepted that DL has been willing to buy labor peace, and has the finances to be able to do so. I have often said that I see little difference in the way DL operates now - and historically did - and how WN has operated. It shouldn't be surprising that for years, DL had the best DOT consumer complaint ratio in the industry but lost it to WN who hasn't let go of it for years and years. It's a lot easier to do any job when you are well paid- andthat of course is a relative term.
However, I genuinely do apologize if I turned this thread into another argument about labor when it appears that is not what you want.
We have debated the issue for so long that it has been an underlying current in our discussions - but perhaps it is I who has kept it up front - and perhaps as you say to feed conflict.
I would note that I found it equally contributing to conflict to be singled out by Q as desiring to rat out anyone since there is no evidence in what I wrote to support that is what I have done or would do - on this issue or any other. The flames were further flamed by the comments about pitchforks. My question to you and Q would be how you thought that would create a healthy dialogue and what kind of reaction you thought your comments would elicit.
What does seem apparent is that we have fffigured out after years and years of debate to know how exactly how to push each other's buttons and how to elicit a response - which feeds into our common intense desire to win the argument and often without regard to whether we bloody the other in the process.
Although Q hasn't been involved in our debates near as long as you you and I have, he has picked up very quickly had to do the very same thing.
We can all do better. I have no doubt that all of us are very good people deep to the core.
The forum will be a better place for all of us if we (collective) dial down the rhetoric and attempt to foster a more postiive environment for the exchange of ideas.
Of course all of this doesn't mean that other issues aren't in play in the original thread - and I don't think I ever said that the issue of non-rev protocol or service is the only issue that can be discussed.... just that non-revs' right to complain means that non-rev protocol cannot be avoided.
You felt that you thought there were service issues that should be addressed. Please feel free to comment on them and address them if you would like.
silverbird007
Senior
A friend was traveling to Prague? On Delta a couple of years ago, not sure but I believe he said it was a 767 or 757, anyway when they landed one of the overhead monitors crashed to the floor. I know all airlines have things like this happen everyday, but ......Delta? I was shocked this could happen on Delta.
