Delta Pilots Association

Reply Subscribe

Page 833 of 959

833

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

11-15-2013, 02:21 PM

#8321

Carl Spackler

Back on TDY

Joined APC: Apr 2008

Position: 747-400 Captain

Posts: 12,487

Quote:

Originally Posted by tsquare

OK... assuming you are right..

I am right. I've never said what you've alleged.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tsquare

how are you gonna pay for any lawsuits that are levied upon the doughnuts?

Same way any union does. We'll have insurance, and a contingency fund. The difference is, we'll not have a single lawsuit against us for failing to represent Delta pilots because we were busy representing non-ALPA/non-Delta pilots.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tsquare

THIS is exactly why I won't be a member of the "union".

No it's not. You don't even believe in the concept of organized labor. You're an ALPA supporter now only because you want the union choice that is least like a real union.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tsquare

you will be uninsured except for what you will be able to assess, and when those inevitable lawsuits pop up, you'll be twisting in the wind. But at least the dues will be cheap.

We'll be insured from day one. A suit that was filed on day one would take years to go through the legal process. By then we would have a full contingency fund plus insurance. Try another red herring.

Carl

11-15-2013, 03:47 PM

#8322

scambo1

The Brown Dot +1

Joined APC: Jun 2009

Position: 777B

Posts: 7,775

Quote:

Originally Posted by tsquare

Of course compared to the doughnuts, it is the Great Wall of China. But apparently, according to Carl anyway, they are immune from lawsuits.

I'd agree that it is a large sum compared to the DPA, but the DPA doesn't have 3-4 pending lawsuits one of which could well be over a $B and that's not spin.

11-15-2013, 04:42 PM

#8323

johnso29

Moderator

Joined APC: Oct 2006

Position: B757/767

Posts: 13,088

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

Pathetic attempt to deflect from the fact you didn't read the post you quoted. Here's the post again for your review:

Notice no mention of an email? Just the hacking of the DPA website, and subsequent lawsuit. And this was your response:

Hmmmm......I wonder HOW 80kts found out about DPA stating they'll file a lawsuit.......

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

Your desire to knee-jerk was so strong, you didn't even read the post. Your emotional rant goes off on the TWA lawsuit without even mentioning the website hacking. Just admit you screwed up and move on to your Pom Pom waving.
Carl

It's so funny how every time you're proven wrong, you resort to insults. I guess that's the only defense you have. Facts hurt, don't they Carl?

11-15-2013, 04:48 PM

#8324

johnso29

Moderator

Joined APC: Oct 2006

Position: B757/767

Posts: 13,088

Quote:

Originally Posted by scambo1

I'd agree that it is a large sum compared to the DPA, but the DPA doesn't have 3-4 pending lawsuits one of which could well be over a $B and that's not spin.

They also don't have an insurance policy. And when the bill comes due from Seham(a firm that SWAPA fired for shady billing) who do you think gets to pay the bill?

11-15-2013, 05:03 PM

#8325

Carl Spackler

Back on TDY

Joined APC: Apr 2008

Position: 747-400 Captain

Posts: 12,487

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnso29

Hmmmm......I wonder HOW 80kts found out about DPA stating they'll file a lawsuit.......

There's a number of ways one could have found out, but that's not the point. The point is that the email wasn't mentioned. The only thing mentioned was the hacking, and that's the post you quoted. Then you proceeded to go on an emotional tirade about the TWA lawsuit. Stop digging dude...you blew it. It happens.

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnso29

It's so funny how every time you're proven wrong, you resort to insults. I guess that's the only defense you have. Facts hurt, don't they Carl?

What's even funnier is you thinking you've proved anyone wrong. You only prove you're too proud to admit a mistake.

Carl

11-15-2013, 05:10 PM

#8326

Purple Drank

Straight QOL, homie

Joined APC: Feb 2012

Position: Record-Shattering Profit Facilitator

Posts: 4,202

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnso29

They also don't have an insurance policy. And when the bill comes due from Seham(a firm that SWAPA fired for shady billing) who do you think gets to pay the bill?

Wow, you're right. It will be tough for the DPA to recover from the huge TWA lawsuit.

Wait, isn't it ALPA who's facing that lawsuit?

Maybe you should focus on how that will affect us, and not on some obscure "what if" you invent in an attempt to sound like you know what you're talking about (which you clearly do not).

11-15-2013, 05:28 PM

#8327

scambo1

The Brown Dot +1

Joined APC: Jun 2009

Position: 777B

Posts: 7,775

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnso29

They also don't have an insurance policy. And when the bill comes due from Seham(a firm that SWAPA fired for shady billing) who do you think gets to pay the bill?

That's spin....

11-15-2013, 05:39 PM

#8328

Carl Spackler

Back on TDY

Joined APC: Apr 2008

Position: 747-400 Captain

Posts: 12,487

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnso29

They also don't have an insurance policy. And when the bill comes due from Seham(a firm that SWAPA fired for shady billing) who do you think gets to pay the bill?

We think you're kind of funny when you wave your Pom Poms, but a law firm probably won't. You've just stated something as fact when you actually don't know a thing about it. If I were you, I would edit your post and insert the word "allegedly". It would also be prudent if you could actually show where anyone in SWAPA backs up your assertion.

Libel is a real legal issue.

Carl

11-15-2013, 06:51 PM

#8329

Hillbilly

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Oct 2013

Position: 7ERA

Posts: 956

Quote:

Originally Posted by DAL 88 Driver

No. You STILL don't get it. You guys are trying to say I'm blaming the state of the industry on DALPA. That's not what I said. The state of the industry has to do with 9/11, bankruptcy, and management that took unfair advantage of those things to significantly lower pilot costs (IMO way more than was absolutely necessary). I think DALPA agreed to way too much on concessions, but that was only ONE PART of what brought about the current "state of the industry." We cannot change that those things happened, so what's important is how we react (reacted) once the crisis was past. For Delta, that moment was a little over 6 years ago.

Delta came out of bankruptcy with a good outlook for the future. And DALPA acted like everything was going pretty well for our pilots... no mention of anything like restoration. Welcome to DALPA's "new normal."

Then, in 2012, we had a company that had successfully put together one of the most if not THE most impressive mergers in the history of the industry and was making VERY significant profits, with an outlook for more of the same or even better. Did DALPA go for anything like restoration? Did DALPA even go for anything like what our pilots (after years of DALPA working to lower expectations) indicated on their surveys? No. DALPA gets 4-8.5-3-3 and allows more large RJ's so that Delta can provide a better product to our customers using pilots that are not Delta pilots. This, followed by a full court press sales pitch, complete with scare tactics, to get just enough of our pilots to be sure it gets voted in.

From 2007 through today (as I said before, because of the success of our company and the prominence of our pilot group), we've been in a position of leadership to set the bar for the industry. We've set a low bar. How can you possibly not recognize that this has hurt everyone's chances of restoration, including ours?

Now if your objective is not restoration, then it's a whole different story...

Thanks for clarifying. I think I understand your perspective a little better, although I do not completely agree. Your original post did not say this ^^^^. What you said was "I think a good case could be made that we (DALPA) have screwed the pooch for the entire profession by demonstrating acceptance of bankruptcy as a new baseline from which we only expect "reasonable" improvements going forward" and there was no mention of other influences (9/11, bankruptcy, etc) like you went into above, so it came off entirely different like we were the ones who screwed the industry. While I too wish we had achieved more and do not personally accept bankruptcy as a new baseline for anything, your statement didn't make logical sense to me and so I asked the question.

11-15-2013, 07:05 PM

#8330

Hillbilly

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Oct 2013

Position: 7ERA

Posts: 956

Quote:

Originally Posted by tsquare

Cost neutral. Another doughnut talking point.

You take one statement, and enshrine it on your golden tablet.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

No, a direct quote from Bastian and Anderson during an investors call. Care to continue making a fool of yourself?

Carl

Suppose I had been giving Carl and tsquare each $20 a week for lunch money for the last 15 years and then Carl negotiated a deal with me where he would now get $25 per week in return for facilitating me only having to give tsquare $15 a week. To me this is a cost neutral deal, since I'm still only out $40 per week, and I would feel comfortable stating that to anyone who asked, even on an investors call. To use my statement that it was a cost neutral deal to then imply that Carl gave up as much as he gained and therefore gained nothing in the deal overall would be inaccurate and completely false.