Carl Spackler

It's hard to discuss this when there is so much evidence to the contrary. 2 trillion were conservative estimates at the time. The world economies are still suffering from it because of the continuing need to defend against an ever evolving terrorist enemy. The increased costs of security adds nothing to the productivity and innovation of the world economy. It just continues to take, and take.

Totally disagree. 9-11 was FAR worse.

I believe that's right.

Totally agree.

Carl

FIIGMO

Carl,

I am not even sure of your seniority, but did you consider the buyout as proposed recently with our company? With your frozen pension the extra buyout etc.... was it something you considered? Do you want to do anything else or would you like to stay here?

Would a more lucrative buyout get you to go?

I ask for a simple reason.... How much longer do you want to do this? I sense a lot of discontent, it in no way is meant to convey you are not dedicated ( my personal guess is you are disillusioned with the profession like us all) but I am curious where your barometer fell or rose in reference to a buy out...

Just curious...

Phuz

What is it like being the only smart guy on the internet?

And, why are you still paying part of every Frontier customer's fare?

Carl Spackler

You're totally missing Tom's point. I've bolded it below for you:

That is unarguably correct. I don't know if it was Ron Allen or Leo Mullin because I was at NWA at the time. You weren't here either. Tom was. Might have been both guys, because "a contract is a contract" wasn't invented by either one of them.

The one certainty, is management blaming pilot salary. The other much newer certainty, is the number of young pilots who parrot this nonsense.

Carl

forgot to bid

I enjoy it. Wait, who you talking about?

We're not paying that. Delta is. We're trying to help them stop it and we're relying on ALPA's lawyers to make that happen.

Phuz

Gee maybe that has something to do with the fact that they've been exiled from your cockpits, and so they never learned a thing from your generation.

Carl Spackler

This is tin foil hat stuff Dude. You can't ignore 9-11 without sounding foolish. Neither airline would have been close to BK without 9-11. Thus a strategic default thesis would have required advanced knowledge of 9-11 by the CEO's of NWA and DAL.

Don't drive to the airport for your next commute Bar...I'm sending a black helicopter for you.

You know my feelings on this Bar. You are absolutely correct.

Carl

Bill Lumberg

With our lower pay rates, I bet the company doesn't mind the higher DC costs. Many North guys have a frozen pension, or may have just started the DC plan. We are still a bargain, and if the Airtran guys can get Southwest wages, we should too. New fees and synergies could help with that.

Phuz

Thanks for biting, but ... BS you aren't paying it. Come on FTB even you can see that money coming off of a corporate balance sheet reduces your bargaining power. Who put that money on the balance sheet anyway, the rampers?

forgot to bid

It's not B.S.

Our salaries are not being reduced to help subsidize Frontier. The rates they pay Shuttle and CHQ would be no higher than they'd pay ASA/Skywest/Compass to do the same flying. It's just we all know where the money ends up.

But we're not paying for it because our pay tables are already set until 2013. Delta is paying. Next year we'll negotiate it all out and by then sure as hell ALPA better have put a stop to subsidizing Frontier and kicked RAH out of DCI.

I hang my head because chances are we won't. Then you have a point, we'll end up paying for it. But Carl and many if not most of us who bother to be here despise the RAH situation and to a greater extent the DCI situation and we're discussing it and have been discussing it for several months now. We're pretty much all in agreement, it's a farce. It's gaming the system. Kick em' out.

Short of that, legally RAH is not in violation of our scope clause right now. There is nothing to grieve until RAH is found to be STS and they haven't been except in a specific representation issue brought by the IBT who knew full well specificity about STS was key to their airlines well being while still achieving their goal.

We all believe RAH is STS. We just have to prove it at the NMB or cause the legal definitions to change so that holdings companies are automatically STS. Plan A imho is change the definition so any and all are automatically removed from DCI, plan B is to pursue STS for RAH and grieve it.

ALPA promised to look at it, waiting for a response. That should've been here by now, hence, the question about what's the latest and greatest about RAH?