Dog Wonder
Veteran
Was the RC4 any part of representing the majority?
Usairways Sells Erj-70's And Slots To Republic
- Thread starter JAMAKE1
- Start date
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Nov 9, 2003
- 16,512
- 5,865
- Banned
- #62
USA320Pilot said:
Nice spin....
Unfortunately it disregards the fact that I needed no one's permission to post the contents of an email I received - check the law and prove me wrong if you can. Apparently W.S. wasn't too upset - I've never heard from him about this alledged "violation of trust". Perhaps it was someone else that didn't like you being caught being dishonest.
As for lack of character, how about someone who invents "facts" to support a contrived argument about character? "Facts" that were proved false by the email I posted.
Oddly enough, while catching up on my reading from the latest MEC quarterly meeting I ran across your name. Seems someone was correcting misinformation you had spread....
Jim
Dog Wonder
Veteran
misinformation makes the flowers grow.
And it only gets more interesting...
With the announcement by the AAA MEC that they would be moving forward with the MDA grievence, the Teamsters unit representing the pilots of both Chautauqua and Shuttle America countered with their own announcement that they have no plans to allow anything other than the asset sale required 50% of Republic USX jobs under Jets for Jobs protocal...
Meaning that the Midatlantic Pilots are welcome at Republic only if they lose half the jobs, and all of their senority (You would get Republic DOH). They (IBT) did say that they "might" be willing to show some flexibility if ALPA was willing to fence all the MDA pilots only into the current MDA aircraft, and then grant ALL future Republic USX E-170 and E-190 growth at 100% to the CHQ pilots alone.
Nice...
Shuttle America gets bought up, and only brings to the table a certificate, and a handful of old Saabs, and they get full intergration. MDA gets bought up, and gets no intergration whatsoever even though we bring 28 large jets, the ONLY ability to grow into 90 seaters, the order stream/delivery positions at reduced prices, and the flying, slots, and ground assets/people to allow those aircraft to be operated...
What is so different...? Other than CHQ pilot's greed...
Since ALPA seems so content to quote the MDA pilots ALPA merger policy so often, it might behoove them to keep those very caveats in mind during any negotiations towards resolving the MDA grievence.
And on a semi-related note, the MDA pilots have now officially retained the legal representation of M. Haber, attorney at law...
With the announcement by the AAA MEC that they would be moving forward with the MDA grievence, the Teamsters unit representing the pilots of both Chautauqua and Shuttle America countered with their own announcement that they have no plans to allow anything other than the asset sale required 50% of Republic USX jobs under Jets for Jobs protocal...
Meaning that the Midatlantic Pilots are welcome at Republic only if they lose half the jobs, and all of their senority (You would get Republic DOH). They (IBT) did say that they "might" be willing to show some flexibility if ALPA was willing to fence all the MDA pilots only into the current MDA aircraft, and then grant ALL future Republic USX E-170 and E-190 growth at 100% to the CHQ pilots alone.
Nice...
Shuttle America gets bought up, and only brings to the table a certificate, and a handful of old Saabs, and they get full intergration. MDA gets bought up, and gets no intergration whatsoever even though we bring 28 large jets, the ONLY ability to grow into 90 seaters, the order stream/delivery positions at reduced prices, and the flying, slots, and ground assets/people to allow those aircraft to be operated...
What is so different...? Other than CHQ pilot's greed...
Since ALPA seems so content to quote the MDA pilots ALPA merger policy so often, it might behoove them to keep those very caveats in mind during any negotiations towards resolving the MDA grievence.
And on a semi-related note, the MDA pilots have now officially retained the legal representation of M. Haber, attorney at law...
TheLarkAscending
Veteran
BoeingBoy said:
....and the laughs just keep on coming. Jim, you don't even have to supply the rope! Someone's own words manage to do the hanging so well, each and every time. 
PS Your dot dot dots are cute, btw.
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- May 18, 2003
- 8,175
- 1,539
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- May 18, 2003
- 8,175
- 1,539
BoeingBoy:
BoeingBoy said: "Oddly enough, while catching up on my reading from the latest MEC quarterly meeting I ran across your name. Seems someone was correcting misinformation you had spread."
USA320Pilot comments: If I make a mistake so be it. I admit it and move on; however, unlike other people my intent is to provide accurate information and to not purposely provide false information. In fact, the reason the MEC communications committee chairman wrote a resolution to remove certain pilots from the ALPA message board, which was approved by the MEC, was to prevent the spread of misinformation and if I am not mistaken, you support the people the resolution targeted.
BoeingBoy, how can you consciously support people that are allegedly dishonest or are so called fellow "darksiders"?
Regards,
USA320Pilot
BoeingBoy said: "Oddly enough, while catching up on my reading from the latest MEC quarterly meeting I ran across your name. Seems someone was correcting misinformation you had spread."
USA320Pilot comments: If I make a mistake so be it. I admit it and move on; however, unlike other people my intent is to provide accurate information and to not purposely provide false information. In fact, the reason the MEC communications committee chairman wrote a resolution to remove certain pilots from the ALPA message board, which was approved by the MEC, was to prevent the spread of misinformation and if I am not mistaken, you support the people the resolution targeted.
BoeingBoy, how can you consciously support people that are allegedly dishonest or are so called fellow "darksiders"?
Regards,
USA320Pilot
TheLarkAscending
Veteran
USA320Pilot said:
Didn't you just agree with Scot about staying on topic? <_<
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- May 18, 2003
- 8,175
- 1,539
Lark, yes I did then I read BoeingBoy’s post and elected to comment. When events change so do decisions, which is exactly what a good pilot does in-flight. If events change, so does the decision(s).
Regards,
USA320Pilot
Regards,
USA320Pilot
TheLarkAscending
Veteran
USA320Pilot said:
Oh, So you've met Jim? Yes, I would agree, he's a great pilot!
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- May 18, 2003
- 8,175
- 1,539
BoeingBoy:
I find it interesting that you take every comment personal. What’s wrong? Are you a little thin skinned, unable to take criticism, and then try to deflect the attention by claiming it’s “mud slinging�
There is a difference in “mudslinging†and calling a “spade a spadeâ€.
By the way, if you believe my criticism is unfounded then why do you post the same message over-and-over again? If you’re a person with such strong character than why even respond…except this is the typical response of the dishonest so called “darksiders†and their supporters.
After all it's much easier to try to discredit the critique than to accept comment...right?
I guess that is why you refuse to answer my questions and simply post a comment made months ago, when events change. As I said before, events change often during a flight and the pilot must change their approach too, thus a comment that was made yesterday could be changed today.
Regards,
USA320Pilot
P.S. Could you post my comment made on May 2 2005, 10:28 PM again...we have not read it enough. After all, why not sit back and post it over-and-over again and never repond to a direct and difficult question. With that said, let me ask you a uestion again...how can you consciously support people that are allegedly dishonest by misrepresenting information (according to the MEC and conversation made in "open" session) or are so called fellow "darksiders"?
I find it interesting that you take every comment personal. What’s wrong? Are you a little thin skinned, unable to take criticism, and then try to deflect the attention by claiming it’s “mud slinging�
There is a difference in “mudslinging†and calling a “spade a spadeâ€.
By the way, if you believe my criticism is unfounded then why do you post the same message over-and-over again? If you’re a person with such strong character than why even respond…except this is the typical response of the dishonest so called “darksiders†and their supporters.
After all it's much easier to try to discredit the critique than to accept comment...right?
I guess that is why you refuse to answer my questions and simply post a comment made months ago, when events change. As I said before, events change often during a flight and the pilot must change their approach too, thus a comment that was made yesterday could be changed today.
Regards,
USA320Pilot
P.S. Could you post my comment made on May 2 2005, 10:28 PM again...we have not read it enough. After all, why not sit back and post it over-and-over again and never repond to a direct and difficult question. With that said, let me ask you a uestion again...how can you consciously support people that are allegedly dishonest by misrepresenting information (according to the MEC and conversation made in "open" session) or are so called fellow "darksiders"?
Light Years
Veteran
- Aug 27, 2002
- 2,878
- 0
Rico said:
Hey Rico, do you think the F/As should do the same or would they fall under some sort of "me-too" thing? The F/As don't even have a J4J program besides MAA... what happens to them?
St. Leibowitz
Member
- Aug 19, 2002
- 60
- 0
Rico said:
Actually it is rumored that CHQ proposed a straight staple for the SA guys and that the integration issue has gone to an arbitrator.
