IPA boys, this will make you smile.
04-11-2010, 07:35 AM
#61
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2010
Position: Socket Drawer
Posts: 1,797
04-11-2010, 08:04 AM
#63
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Position: 757/767
Posts: 579
You don't seem to see the contradiction in your statement. My understanding is that UPS offered to stop the furlough (thereby reducing associated downgrades and forced displacements to ANC) if we accepted a lesser guarantee (like FedEx). That would require lesser paychecks. It seems to me that by refusing that offer the entire membership would meet your definition of "greedy."
04-11-2010, 08:20 AM
#64
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Spartan
Posts: 3,652
Weatherman,
You don't seem to see the contradiction in your statement. My understanding is that UPS offered to stop the furlough (thereby reducing associated downgrades and forced displacements to ANC) if we accepted a lesser guarantee (like FedEx). That would require lesser paychecks. It seems to me that by refusing that offer the entire membership would meet your definition of "greedy."
You don't seem to see the contradiction in your statement. My understanding is that UPS offered to stop the furlough (thereby reducing associated downgrades and forced displacements to ANC) if we accepted a lesser guarantee (like FedEx). That would require lesser paychecks. It seems to me that by refusing that offer the entire membership would meet your definition of "greedy."
04-11-2010, 08:33 AM
#65
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,224
They aren't telling everyone to stop earning a living, just fly your line. To make it more reasonable, you can trade up 5 hours.
Nice try deflecting criticism. You justify being greedy by talking about these guys possible career earnings. Weak. Others have resisted the urge, but since it's just little ol' you in Miami, what difference would that make? What if everyone else thought like you?
A real piece of work...
Nice try deflecting criticism. You justify being greedy by talking about these guys possible career earnings. Weak. Others have resisted the urge, but since it's just little ol' you in Miami, what difference would that make? What if everyone else thought like you?
A real piece of work...
04-11-2010, 08:35 AM
#66
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Position: 757/767
Posts: 579
As for my postings, I have not started any threads, just replied to posts, such as yours.
04-11-2010, 08:48 AM
#67
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2005
Position: 767 captain
Posts: 2,701
Weatherman,
You don't seem to see the contradiction in your statement. My understanding is that UPS offered to stop the furlough (thereby reducing associated downgrades and forced displacements to ANC) if we accepted a lesser guarantee (like FedEx). That would require lesser paychecks. It seems to me that by refusing that offer the entire membership would meet your definition of "greedy."
You don't seem to see the contradiction in your statement. My understanding is that UPS offered to stop the furlough (thereby reducing associated downgrades and forced displacements to ANC) if we accepted a lesser guarantee (like FedEx). That would require lesser paychecks. It seems to me that by refusing that offer the entire membership would meet your definition of "greedy."
04-11-2010, 11:04 AM
#69
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: Dozing for Dollars
Posts: 78
Weatherman,
You don't seem to see the contradiction in your statement. My understanding is that UPS offered to stop the furlough (thereby reducing associated downgrades and forced displacements to ANC) if we accepted a lesser guarantee (like FedEx). That would require lesser paychecks. It seems to me that by refusing that offer the entire membership would meet your definition of "greedy."
You don't seem to see the contradiction in your statement. My understanding is that UPS offered to stop the furlough (thereby reducing associated downgrades and forced displacements to ANC) if we accepted a lesser guarantee (like FedEx). That would require lesser paychecks. It seems to me that by refusing that offer the entire membership would meet your definition of "greedy."
I was at the IPA meeting where SF presented the company's demands for concessions to stop the furlough. It was much more than a reduction of guarantee. IIRC in addition to a guarantee reduction it included going back to 2008 pay scales (which represents a larger percentage cut to junior pilots), a 2 or 3% reduction in B plan contributions, and PBS. There were several more items in addition. And no snap backs IIRC. (Can someone here who was at that GMM confirm my statements?) You're statement that simply a reduced guarantee would stop the furlough is disingenuous.
I can not in my life recall when an airline furloughed pilots when they were making any money, much less billions of dollars profit and giving bonuses and raises to management.
So am I greedy or is it that I just don't like to have a large object shoved up my ass? You have some nerve.
g
04-11-2010, 12:31 PM
#70
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: The IPA EB speaks for me
Posts: 529
Roberto,
You are the penultimate bid number cruncher. That's my compliment. It leads me to this:
Figures LIE and LIARS figure.
Please stop rationalizing in public. It's embarrassing.
You could have been part of something great in difficult times.
You chose against it. It's to the point of flame baiting, which doesn't help anyone unless fed by schadenfreude.
'Nuff said.
You are the penultimate bid number cruncher. That's my compliment. It leads me to this:
Figures LIE and LIARS figure.
Please stop rationalizing in public. It's embarrassing.
You could have been part of something great in difficult times.
You chose against it. It's to the point of flame baiting, which doesn't help anyone unless fed by schadenfreude.
'Nuff said.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Lowtimer77
Regional
55
11-10-2008 06:10 PM
