Possible T/A for MEC Review??
#321
I can't believe you didn't get a rules infraction warning for this. I would have gotten a "flame bait" warning from the moderators.
He can say MD88 if he wants to. He can reflect back on what he enjoyed doing....blah blah blah.
None of us have much of a contract. To argue with that would be fruitless indeed.
He can say MD88 if he wants to. He can reflect back on what he enjoyed doing....blah blah blah.
None of us have much of a contract. To argue with that would be fruitless indeed.
#325
#326
#327
But I Will give you the courtesy of explaining why it is that I questioned you in the first place. You stated that your contract was crap and that you flew MD88s. IF you fly MD88s, you fly for Delta. I defy you to find an overall better contract currently in the industry. Therefore, I questioned your situational awareness wrt the rest of the industry for that reason. But... since you "mistyped" your aircraft type, I guess my question need not be answered by you. Carry on.
#328
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 56
Your actually correct, let's not have "feel good motions" because we shouldn't be a "Glee Club". Strength and unity are an absolute if we want to get an industry leading JCBA. Having pilot's question the AIP, and possibly soon to be TA, before we have any concrete information shows the company that we dont trust our JNC or either MEC Chairman. To me, doing so shows weakness and not strength and is a"Glee Club". Exactly what they (management) want to see and playing into their hands. Now when the appropriate forums are available and we all have been fully briefed by the MEC's and JNC that is the time to raise questions and concerns. Not at this critical juncture.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post