navigatro

Thank you for your support. My statement was not directed at everyone, just those that were too greedy, in my belief, to participate at all.

Captain Cook

You senior/older guys that say us junior guys should just except a furlough because we knew the rules and we just need to accept it should be ashamed of yourselves.

The ONLY reason us junior guys are staring down the barrel of being furloughed is because of the Age 60 rule change.

It is very ignorant and arrogant of you to preach to us about 'entitlement'. We have young children to feed. Get it through your heads!

I'll gladly go out and do manual labor to feed my family, but I will not listen to you old windbags preach to me after your windfall.

Ave Joe. I'd like to know who you are for real, because I'd like you to say those thing to me face to face. I suspect you wouldn't be so bold.

Naven

But you do understand that the MOU was 100% voluntary as opposed to what BT is proposing an assessment of all members to help pay the medical of those furloughed. I volunteered for JS and some short term leave. I understood that I would just get paid for my vacaton not actually have the days off because I already had them off.

757upspilot

Not over sixty and comments like this make me wonder why I participated in the MOU.

Naven

We all appreciate your participation and all those that participated in the MOU. However all he said was if it wasn't for the age 60 change we wouldn't be looking at a furlough. We currently have 200 plus pilots overs age 60 currently holding a bid in the front seat of something. I don't blame you or anyone that is over 60 continuing to fly, that is your right and no one should try to make you feel guilty about it.

Everyone on the property came here before the retirement rule change. The IPA did an awesome job of trying to protect its most junior members. I would hate to see all the hard work go by the wayside.

Tigerpilot1995

It is important to note that before all things, unions exist to PROTECT jobs. Secondly, I don't think one bottom 300 guy likes that the contract was violated to save our jobs. I think it is well known that the MOU was not perfect. Two of the guys running for Pres. are responsible for the MOU violating the contract. Someone has to be responsible for that. Thirdly, CC is correct, age 65 did effect the fact that a furlough is happening. Nothing to get sensitive about, just a stated fact. Next, I am a 32 year old, bottom 300 guy that does NOT feel I am entitled to jack &%it. (please be careful assuming that all 30 somethings feel they are "entitled") If furloughed I will work my butt off to pay my bills and put food on my family's plates. "would you like fries with that"? . Finally, I appreciate everyone that contributed to the MOU. You did so not just to help the bottom 300 but to help yourself as documented many times by the union.

100% IPA

Captain Cook

Oh boo hoo! Did I hurt your feelings? Care to elaborate on what I said that was so hurtful. Care to respond with anything other than feigned disgust and innuendo?

757upspilot

Ok you win. When you are working your next job tell everyone who will listen that you went out of the way to **** people off who had and would help you.

Freightpuppy

You and AvgJoe have rocks in your head.....how is expecting your UNION (do you guys know the definition of UNION?) brothers and sisters to help you out in a time of need a sense of entitlement? If the tables were turned, I wonder how you would feel.

Shaggy1970

Avg, Don't make me bring up your past posts before the MOU was ever put in place, I think you my friend would be ashamed of yourself as you should be now!

I provide for myself just fine, obviously you don't read any of my posts! I have always maintained that I will survive and don't want a penny in handouts from anyone especially the likes of you! That being said, and now read very closely, as you seem not be capable of reading and comprehending the english language, the number I have heard being thrown around is 65 hours at everyone's current pay rate would have stopped the company dead in its track when it came time to furloghing a single member and leaving our contact alone.

So lets say a captian making $237, who has the most to lose, gave back 65 hours. Thats $15405 before taxes, over the course of three years that would have been $5135, or a trip to HKG and back! I am not asking for a penny mind you but just breaking the numbers down. You don't think this pilot group would have been better off if the one that has the most to lose donated a trip to Hong Kong and back? No MOU, contract left intact, happy pilot force & etc! I ask you and others that were not in the 550 that gave alot more than that, how do you wake up in the morning and look at yourself? You and the ones that are still trying to justify this MOU thing should really be ashamed of yourselfs. Justifing why it is you think you did the right thing by perserving the contract, what a joke! Do me a favor, how about you give me a call and lets talk about it, face to face! Maybe that should be a open offer to the 2400 or so that didn't give a cent to make this place a better place to work! No handouts just facts bro!