TillerEnvy

Do I/did I say that? I don't recall.

Mulva

Tiller,

My bad if not you. One of the RAHBros (Sizzle, Stinky, ToiletDuck, etc.?) loves using that term. I took a shot in the dark and picked you. Just chalk it up to another Mulva disinformation campaign! Sorry.

sticky

...the only thing that will come in the future is that what you just said is inaccurate and incomplete...

Mulva

Nope. I'm just a shiny Airbus driver. But since you bring up the issue of Company responses to IBT rhetoric, any idea why the Company would feel compelled to respond to the following, some innocuous statement made inth PDU:


Bad management! I can't believe they would stoop so low as to withhold "mystery evidence."



Now, had the IBT been a little less selective with their information, they might have framed the update with something along the lines of this:
Maybe I should be writing your PDU's, huh?

So, basically, IBT (once again! see MSLI arbitration) somehow managed to violate court ordered confidentiality. The Company called a "time out" until that matter could be addressed by the Court. The issue was addressed on April 24th when the judge essentially spanked IBT, reminding them of the stipulation and protective order on making confidential information public. The Judge warned them that further violations would be sanctionable.


Nice work IBT! Don't you RAHbros just love how you never get the whole story from your Union? Just the parts that ensure blame can be deflected elsewhere. Anyone going to call your leadership to get their take? Remember, YOU are paying the bill here. Shouldn't you demand that they share the whole story with their membership?

Purposefully vague statements with gross omissions certainly can influence how the message is perceived, huh?

IBT RULE #1: ALWAYS DEFLECT BLAME. NEVER ADMIT FAULT.

Weak response Dude!

I think my point was just made Stinky. It would be completely accurate to view the IBT message as "inaccurate and incomplete."

Mulva

United States District Court for the District of Colorado

U.S. Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix presided over this one. Give her a shout and see what is "inaccurate and incomplete."

Bolo

Stinky, Lets here the excuse or next spin from you to defend the IBT? IBT needs to learn how to play by the rules. They can't keep their mouths shut.

sizzlechest

Play by the rules? That's a knee slapper... it appears some backroom dealing is still going on with FAPAInvest and that was what RAH and FAPAInvest were hoping to keep under wraps. Now they have/will have it in black and white... but it never does get old. IBT is sharing with the group... if they have nothing to hide, why didn't they just produce what was asked for???

sticky

TillerEnvy

Just curious what my FROBros thoughts are on the $100K back room check given to FFAPA.

sticky

i wonder if when people violate the RLA they suffer the same punishment as when the Environmental Protection Act, Civil Rights Act, or National Banking Act...

Probably not because nobody cares about pilots....only squirrels, minority groups, and money.