Originally Posted by queuetip

If you read Chapter 32 of the FOM, there's a ton of room for interpretation and misunderstanding. I say, give any coworker the benefit of the doubt when guidance is ambiguous. For example, Chapter 32 says to ensure that words and actions are professional and consistent with Delta's corporate "Rules of the Road." What if a coworker's jacket was vomited on by an ill passenger and said employee only had a "non-compliant" North Face jacket to put on when it's 5 degrees outside and snowing? Well the first tenet of the rules of the road are to put safety first - always. A rational person would say, put on the North Face to ensure your safety from a hazardous environment. The term "Jacket" as referenced in the table is also ambiguous. It only refers to "The jacket". What is "The jacket"? I think they're lucky that they get the compliance that they do considering it's only referenced as "The jacket". If, however, Delta issued a specific "sport coat" or "jacket", then it would be less ambiguous, but Delta Air Lines saw fit not to issue a specific uniform coat. Additionally - under specifications - "The jacket" is supposed to contain vendor applied striping. Which vendor? The general office vendor? OOfff, I'd be willing to wager $10 to a charity of your choice that you don't have general office vendor applied striping on your coat. The FOM says that the uniform must be properly worn in public view. Last I checked, airports and airplanes require a ticket to get past security. Outside of security, sure that seems to be public access as anyone is free to walk up and purchase a ticket from the ticket counter. Inside of security though, there's no argument access is restricted to only individuals holding boarding passes, or employed by an airline, airport, or government agency. Heck, if you read the specifications for "the jacket" it doesn't allow for you to remove the jacket on the flight deck or while commuting. There's no bigger window for the public to view you than through the front window of your office. Additionally, if we say that the public is anyone inside the airport, then certainly you should be wearing the jacket, buttoned, while deadheading across the ocean or good old USA as well.

OOfff - I'm sure you're a better person than I am, smarter, taller, kinder and all that, but just because one of our coworkers isn't in line with your interpretation of the FOM doesn't make him or her a bad person. Maybe the FO stole his or her jacket while doing a plane and crew swap (happened to me), or maybe coffee got spilled on it the last trip and it hasn't come back from the dry cleaner. Maybe one of the buttons departed the coat or maybe there's some striping that is being applied by the company vendor, who knows? A little grace goes a long way though.

Originally Posted by cantflylist

You win APC for the day. We have gone so far from being empathetic these days. It seems kill or be killed is the new normal. kinda sucks

Originally Posted by neodd

Lots of new FOs without hats because they don’t have brass yet. No hat brass, no hat worn. No name tags either. Barely have wings.

Originally Posted by bluejuice71

For what? Enforcing our FOM required uniform policy? We all make 6 figures. Wear the uniform like required and there will be no issues. And packable light black jacket for walk around’s is a no go. That’s precisely what FO was wearing when LCA came to cockpit and chewed us both out about. The FO for not wearing an approved uniform and me for not enforcing the policy. If you tools have an issue take it up with your chief pilots and see how well that goes over. Now back to eating your fruit loops.

Originally Posted by Softpayman

Enforcing how exactly? Two can play the game there hoss. Hope you're 100% standard across the board.

Originally Posted by marcal

Multiple ACPs and CPs have resigned on his watch. An ACP actually told me he “wouldn’t wish working for current RD on his worst enemy”. There is a reason they need to blast the entire base with multiple requests to apply for these positions.

Our C66 reps have issues with the current RD, as do LLCPs.

In my one interaction with him he seemed fine but I don’t work for him.

Originally Posted by bugman61

It's hilarious seeing all of these people posting on this thread that obviously aren't in NYC or don't have friends who are. There is a reason why they repeatedly put out open calls for resumes for NYC CP/ACP, and lots of form emails went out this week inviting people to apply. Nobody wants to work there, people routinely leave early. The problem is that after the current RD is gone, the only people left will probably see the world the way he does. If the next RD comes from that office and not someplace else it will be more of the same.

Originally Posted by marcal

I saw you quoted me, but it seems you are agreeing with me, correct? Everything I have heard is firsthand from ACPs, CPs, C66 Reps, LCPs that have actually spoken with me. None of it is hearsay. RT and BU, the two prior NYC RD's were universally liked and respected in the office. The mood has definitely soured in the NYC CPO under current leadership, no doubt. But again, its just what I've been told by current and former troops.

Also, I agree that the CPO job is not ideal if you are not a local, but they never needed to blast the whole base for applicants before the current RD was running things.