US Pilots Labor Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
I did my research, read Kevin Laufer's story in an AOPA article. You are correct, an East pilot who started this forum. I have a lot of respect for a person who starts a business rather than sitting around feeding off the government. I've taken the attitude that all East pilots should not be painted with the Usapian brush. Out of respect and advice by counsel, I notified Kevin of my intent to investigate these threats against me. He's offered his cooperation.This not a civil matter, rather an investigation into possible criminal activity. All I can do is tell my story, (which I did), produce evidence and have the authorities do the digging.

I am not the one who made threats. If you visit my posting history, I tried to approach my opponents with a sense of humor. I soon learned Usapians take themselves way too seriously. My position hardened as attacks intensified to a threat level 2.

The gloves have come off.

Now I wish I had kept copies of similar threats made against me by the notably absent "EastUS". Perhaps those of you that received similar threats did so. I believe he was wacky enough to go "airline" at any moment.
 
....... Now who are you going to believe. East pilot under oath or the CEO trying to sell a cheap contract?

I wouldn't believe either one of them!!!

Think Jack, "we thought the arbitration was only binding on the merger committee", Stephan.

Doug, "I often say things that are not really true", Parker.


But my favorite person to not believe is Lee, "we can get DOH with a cost neutral contract/////usapa represents the majority of West pilots", Sleezham.
 
I wouldn't believe either one of them!!!

Think Jack, "we thought the arbitration was only binding on the merger committee", Stephan.

Doug, "I often say things that are not really true", Parker.


But my favorite person to not believe is Lee, "we can get DOH with a cost neutral contract/////usapa represents the majority of West pilots", Sleezham.
OK Doubting Thomas. Here is one you can take to the bank.."THIS IS FOR YOU GUYS TO DECIDE....." :p
 
It is an investment you idiot...the same way that Don Corleon got people to invest with him!!
We had the figurative gun at our heads and did not get to vote on the pension termination
...please read these posts with a little more insight than a 6th grader.

NICDOA
NPJB
Sorry B. You are a hypocrite. And you are wrong. If the pi$$ poor pay you now receive was forced on you then it was not an investment. It was a concession. If your elected reps agreed to it without giving poor old you a vote, well that's how democracy works. We live by representation. Vote them out at the next opportunity. Not everything gets a vote. Your ELECTED EAST PILOT REPS voted for you.

If you had bought the company out through an ESOP, THAT would be an investment. But that's not what we are talking about. You collectively gave in to the concessions because you knew the alternative was almost immediate CH7.

If you want to call it an investment, that's fine with me. But give ALPA credit for it. They saved your job, for cryin' out loud. But to claim it was an investment, and then crucify ALPA for doing it is simply two faced. No two ways about it.

Like I said, get your story straight and stick to it.
 
Can you show me where he said this? I've heard it mentioned many times and I see you have in quotes. I'd like to listen or read it for myself.
Why bother PI. So he never says things he doesn't mean is my take. Especially, ''THIS IS FOR YOU GUYS TO DECIDE..."
 
Can you show me where he said this? I've heard it mentioned many times and I see you have in quotes. I'd like to listen or read it for myself.
It's in one of the pilot crew news videos a few months back. Let me ask you this. Parker has said:
- HP (aka West) would have faced a cash crunch and US (aka East) would have liquidated without the merger.
- HP would have filed for BK and US would have liquidated without the merger.
- Neither HP nor US would have survived without the merger.

Notice anything consistent in each of those statements other than "without the merger"?

Jim
 
Why bother PI. So he never says things he doesn't mean is my take. Especially, ''THIS IS FOR YOU GUYS TO DECIDE..."

Actually, the "you guys" was an aside. He's gone to great lengths lately to explain that the court will end up deciding absent capitulation by one side or the other.

Jim
 
Can you show me where he said this? I've heard it mentioned many times and I see you have in quotes. I'd like to listen or read it for myself.

It was in a crew news a few months back. I forget what the topic was, or I would go find it for you. Maybe somene else remembers.

Actually, my take on it when he said it was not how people are portraying the comment. I think what he was trying to say was something to the effect of sometimes his statements need to be embellished to get the point across to the audience he is addressing.
 
OK Doubting Thomas. Here is one you can take to the bank.."THIS IS FOR YOU GUYS TO DECIDE....." :p

No doubting Thomas here...I believed Parker when he said that.

Notice he did not say..."THIS IS FOR USAPA TO DECIDE..."

Here is another one I believed.."Per the TA, the company has accepted the Nicoalu award"....got that one on US Airways stationary, so I doubt it was an inadvertent Freudian slip.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top