CallawayGolf
Veteran
- Nov 13, 2009
- 1,920
- 1,961
And what would the vote totals be if half of those 469 votes (i.e. the margin of victory) went the other way? Half of 469 is 234 or 235 which sounds like a couple of hundered to me.
US Pilots Labor Discussion
- Thread starter Richard
- Start date
- Status
Metroyet
Veteran
- Nov 1, 2008
- 2,571
- 5,664
I'd love to know what that vote would look like today...after 3+ years of failure and not the slightest glimmer of hope of anything changing.
cactusboy53
Veteran
- May 9, 2007
- 2,649
- 7,407
Soooo.........469 votes MORE, right? IF you take 469 and divide it by 2, you get 234.5. IF 235 of those 469 HAD voted for ALPA, ALPA would have remained on property by ONE VOTE.
This is the definition of "a couple..":
A COUPLE OF: a couple of - more than one but indefinitely small in number; "a few roses"; "a couple of roses" (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/a+couple+of)
Soooo......."a couple hundred votes" could EASILY mean 200 or more votes. No SPIN sonny, just simple mathematics and the command of the English language.
......Opps. Callaway beat me to this in less than two paragraphs...time to put the thesaurus away... For everything you have missed, you have gained something else, and for everything you gain, you lose something else.” Actually things may not be changing for you but hey, so be it! Attrition train is on the way EASTBOUND! MM!
You are often highly agitated with folks who seem to predict the future and assume things of others that are not true. You put some assumptions on me in our last exchange and I did not bother addressing them as I deemed it and most of this banter not worthy of my time. I do enjoy some humor and I want to thank you for this - yesterday at 5.50pm in post #14364 you had this to say -
"Thanks for admitting that you cannot predict the future. It is a pet peeve of mine when people(both sides) state unequivocally that "this" or "that" would have happened. You can lay odds, but that's about it."
Less than 24 hours later we received the "assurance" that your radiant hypocrisy bloomers are in full view as your chastity dress is lacking sufficient substance as a protective covering. Perhaps it would be best from a credibility standpoint if you stuck to cat fights with prechill.
I guess you missed the post I responded to. (edited: first response was below the belt-it was a long night) Those are the previous posters words I used back on him. I guess I should have put them in quotes, but I figured most could follow from one to another. At least I didn't call him a child molester. "Perhaps" you should stick to staying silent.(see, I used your word from above with the same smart axx tone)
p.s. Sometimes you just have to give a flea ridden cat a bath. They scratch some, but it's hardly a fight
A '99 hire???....Really???....'99???
Here is the deal junior. There are actually those on the West who were somewhat sympathetic to '87..'88 hires..even the furloughed guys like Colello, and especially the furloughed guys who got recalled back to group II then bumped into the 190 after leaving the jobs they found while furloughed.
But a '99 hire throwing out 10-20 year history lessons in an attempt to scab his way over the bottom of the West list just isn't getting any traction.
You do realize that in those 500 jobs you are trying to steal, many are your former classmates at airways, who unlike yourself, actually could get hired at AWA. So you can either stop the smokescreen with the links to AWA's past, or you are going to get a barrage of history lessons on the shithole airline that picked up a loser like you in '99.
Of course it will not have the same impact on this thread, because I will send them to you via the private message function, sparing the very few east posters I still have some respect towards.
Any questions scab?
Ok cleardirect. I guess by now you know that I was yanking your chain. I could practically see you salivating over there, saying "Please say he should have left them in, please say he should have left them in!", because by taking them out it helped us, IF he used the same ratio, right? Say he was going to use 2 to 1 no matter what, and then removed the larger numbers of east inactive, it moves the east group forward?
Maybe you misunderstood what I was talking about, maybe I didn't explain it well. Before I do(try), read pg 23 of the award, and see if you see anything strange there. Keep in mind that you said the PID was May, 2005, and the terms used pre-merger and post-merger.
Contrary to your smart axx tone, I've read it many time, just reread the whole thing again.
I agree with somethings Mr. Nicolau says in the award, but his logic in making the list fails me, and no one has been able to really explain it to me. Maybe you can.
Maybe you misunderstood what I was talking about, maybe I didn't explain it well. Before I do(try), read pg 23 of the award, and see if you see anything strange there. Keep in mind that you said the PID was May, 2005, and the terms used pre-merger and post-merger.
Contrary to your smart axx tone, I've read it many time, just reread the whole thing again.
I agree with somethings Mr. Nicolau says in the award, but his logic in making the list fails me, and no one has been able to really explain it to me. Maybe you can.
No Land Green
Veteran
- Oct 2, 2010
- 760
- 558
Popular vote WON, by 469. That's TWO THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED TWENTY THREE Pilot's were OVER ALPA and their crap. You can play the "electoral" BS all day long. At the end of the day ALPA LOST period.
No Land Green
Veteran
- Oct 2, 2010
- 760
- 558
There would be an even larger number voting for USAPA. You have NO clue what pilots on the East are thinking. I see it every day at work.
No Land Green
Veteran
- Oct 2, 2010
- 760
- 558
Soooo.........469 votes MORE, right? IF you take 469 and divide it by 2, you get 234.5. IF 235 of those 469 HAD voted for ALPA, ALPA would have remained on property by ONE VOTE.
This is the definition of "a couple..":
A COUPLE OF: a couple of - more than one but indefinitely small in number; "a few roses"; "a couple of roses" (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/a+couple+of)
Soooo......."a couple hundred votes" could EASILY mean 200 or more votes. No SPIN sonny, just simple mathematics and the command of the English language.
Enjoy your spin, popular vote called it like it is. Sorry your "career expectations" are not working out on the West. I guess Doug Parker had you all convinced the West would be another Southwest Airlines, funny he doesn't reflect it in your pay........LMAO!!!!!!!!
cactusboy53
Veteran
- May 9, 2007
- 2,649
- 7,407
I fully admit that USAPA is our CBA by a popular vote (duh! WINNING!
). I merely point out that it would have only taken 235 of the 469 votes to have kept ALPA IN. I may have entered the "spin zone" (although you just need to sip a warm cup of tea, and break out your calculator to see where I came up with my figures... :blink as you claim, you sir are eternally in the "angry zone".My career expectations are doing just fine out West. Doug Parker has convinced me of nothing (other than chinos / khaki seem comfortable). He most certainly has gone to great lengths to attempt to convince all of us that we are not worthy of SWA wages.
My pay is just fine for the time being (the other day I had a cancellation due to a mechanical, two other legs a-sectioned that were created by the mechanical, and a DH as a result of the cancellation......ALL AT 100% pay........just the way it ought to be). I even ended up home early....SCHWEEEEET!
Come and join us at: http://www.reformusapa.com/
We can transform USAPA into a true UNION, and move on to a better contract for ALL OF US. DOH is DOA. Isn't it time for you to get a raise and a better QOL? It's your decision......support the mire you are stuck in or help us change overall better conditions and pay.
Since you asked: USAPA says it is free to do just exactly that. We anxiously await the TA proposal to vote on with the "gold standard".
It may pass, just like USAPA got voted in by a couple hundred votes. That doesn't change the fact that the seniority list has already been done. If a new TA is ratified, guess what....... RIPE (just like the 9th said it would be). Guess what? DFR II coming to a Phoenix District Court near you. Guess what? No new contract....FROZEN at your present wages. Guess what? Now there could be damages.
Keep clicking them heels, Dorothy. Kansas is just around the corner.....
C53 reply
I'll start by apologizing for rehashing old material if that is the case. Truthfully, I rarely lurk anymore. Perhaps if new events transpire my attendance will improve. That said, I have a hypothetical to pose. Let's say (by some wild turn of events) that a TA is reached with DOH that is so spectacular (remember that I said hypothetical) that 90% of all pilots (west and east) vote for it. Question: will a DFR be successful?
Do you believe that a judge would grant an injunction against such an overwhelmingly popular TA? If we agreed to binding arbitration, would this not constitute tacit acceptance of DOH? Just curious, not trolling.
I fully admit that USAPA is our CBA by a popular vote (duh! WINNING!
You know what? I truly believe(not promise, not assure, just an idea rolling around in my head) that had you guys given just a little, maybe even as little as a couple year fence
, you may have gotten those few hundred extra votes. You didn't, so the election went the way it did, and here we are.I thought a card drive was coming out after SFO ruled?
No Land Green
Veteran
- Oct 2, 2010
- 760
- 558
I fully admit that USAPA is our CBA by a popular vote (duh! WINNING!
My career expectations are doing just fine out West. Doug Parker has convinced me of nothing (other than chinos / khaki seem comfortable). He most certainly has gone to great lengths to attempt to convince all of us that we are not worthy of SWA wages.
My pay is just fine for the time being (the other day I had a cancellation due to a mechanical, two other legs a-sectioned that were created by the mechanical, and a DH as a result of the cancellation......ALL AT 100% pay........just the way it ought to be). I even ended up home early....SCHWEEEEET!
Come and join us at: http://www.reformusapa.com/
We can transform USAPA into a true UNION, and move on to a better contract for ALL OF US. DOH is DOA. Isn't it time for you to get a raise and a better QOL? It's your decision......support the mire you are stuck in or help us change overall better conditions and pay.
"angry", hardly. "true UNION"???? I guess then DOH must live then. Any raise I get goes right into the bank, no debt sir. LOA 93 is just fine for the time being. I had my financial house in order way before 2003.........Try your mantra on the rest of your West friends and East ALPAphites and come over to the USAPA side and help build a "true UNION" "for ALL OF US"..........SHAM WOW!!!!!!!
No Land Green
Veteran
- Oct 2, 2010
- 760
- 558
You know what? I truly believe(not promise, not assure, just an idea rolling around in my head) that had you guys given just a little, maybe even as little as a couple year fence
Brat you are correct, but that was their choice and gamble. It has led to this and an unknown future. I've talked to the Wye River folks more than once. At the end of the day, they (West), screwed the pooch and would be living their beloved Nic Award. Oh well, the move up has happened on the East side and will only increase, which will make it even harder to get more support for the Nic........
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
