Profit Sharing Grievance
03-14-2014, 07:36 AM
#121
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2010
Position: EWR 777 Captain
Posts: 1,715
03-14-2014, 08:53 AM
#122
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2011
Position: A Nobody
Posts: 1,559
Sunvox
If you read my complete post you would see that his blanket statement "International Law" is what I am poking at. It is not a blanket statement for all the ClassII nav airspace. You will also notice I state how my flights follow those rules along the NAT Track over the Atlantic, we hard set the cleared MACH. Notice I say cleared MACH that is because some may confuse what is in their FP with the clearance.
In the past UAL actually allowed the use of ECON to meet this restriction, as I stated, when I was in the 767 fleet the management actually encouraged it as long as it met the caveat, You couldn't violate the MACH requirements of the track clearance!
So calm your mules and read before you write. You got to realize each airspace has it own rules and to make a blanket statement like the one made isn't correct. Now let me ask you this, have you ever flown through China or Russian airspace? Is this a blanket statement about them also? Each country and airspace have their own unique rules, it is not a blanket International Law!
Whewww
BTW Did you also notice my instruction to FOs whose Captains fail/refuse to follow the FOM guidance? Write them up! Cover your Ass! Of course let them know you are doing it.
If you read my complete post you would see that his blanket statement "International Law" is what I am poking at. It is not a blanket statement for all the ClassII nav airspace. You will also notice I state how my flights follow those rules along the NAT Track over the Atlantic, we hard set the cleared MACH. Notice I say cleared MACH that is because some may confuse what is in their FP with the clearance.
In the past UAL actually allowed the use of ECON to meet this restriction, as I stated, when I was in the 767 fleet the management actually encouraged it as long as it met the caveat, You couldn't violate the MACH requirements of the track clearance!
So calm your mules and read before you write. You got to realize each airspace has it own rules and to make a blanket statement like the one made isn't correct. Now let me ask you this, have you ever flown through China or Russian airspace? Is this a blanket statement about them also? Each country and airspace have their own unique rules, it is not a blanket International Law!
Whewww
BTW Did you also notice my instruction to FOs whose Captains fail/refuse to follow the FOM guidance? Write them up! Cover your Ass! Of course let them know you are doing it.
03-14-2014, 08:59 AM
#123
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2011
Position: A Nobody
Posts: 1,559
Sunvox:
I'll repost what else I wrote:
"I'm basically lazy and hate writing reports, so on my flights we fix the mach where it's required"
Let me say it again, ..."where it's required!!!!!"
Thanks for posting the FOM, but how does my statement compare to what you shoved in my face? Do you think I don't know it?
Now go and show it in the brief to those Captains who don't follow it on your NAT track flights, before you leave Flight Ops, oops the CPO, oops the Captain wouldn't meet the crew because the FOM only says "should."
I'll repost what else I wrote:
"I'm basically lazy and hate writing reports, so on my flights we fix the mach where it's required"
Let me say it again, ..."where it's required!!!!!"
Thanks for posting the FOM, but how does my statement compare to what you shoved in my face? Do you think I don't know it?
Now go and show it in the brief to those Captains who don't follow it on your NAT track flights, before you leave Flight Ops, oops the CPO, oops the Captain wouldn't meet the crew because the FOM only says "should."
03-14-2014, 09:09 AM
#124
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2012
Posts: 342
Make no mistake, the guys who fought the fight at rCAL are not part of the body that makes up ex-CON's of today. They fought a battle and suffered more than many of you will ever understand. For you to attempt to take credit for what those guys did and somehow include yourself with them is wrong - you will never be part of that group.
What your legacy will include is the actions post strike and that's been covered on this and many other forums.
What your legacy will include is the actions post strike and that's been covered on this and many other forums.
03-14-2014, 09:17 AM
#125
Banned
Joined APC: Oct 2012
Posts: 218
03-14-2014, 09:43 AM
#128
Guest
Posts: n/a
They fought a fight that YOU definitely don't appreciate!! Unfortunately, you had no peers (as far as LONG TERM strikers) to learn from when you were in the right seat!! Yes, you had a strike (30 days) and many scabs in that short time but, no one that had to sit out for YEARS which is a whole different ballgame!! I'll be waiting for your excuse!
03-14-2014, 01:08 PM
#130
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2011
Position: A Nobody
Posts: 1,559
hope
"Did you willingly quit United to go to work for Continental? "
What? Where did you get that idea?
How do I say this nicely? When I got hired by UAL in late 70s CAL was my second choice. They had a reputation on the West Coast that was above everyone. I applied and UAL called and this is where I've been since.
If I had been hired at CAL I'd been a "crawl back" who held out until the end from the strike of 83. Had I been looking for a job CAL would have been my last choice up until the Bethune era. In the past few years (prior to the merge) I have been encouraging the young pilot I know looking for a job to apply at CAL because of the age of the Seniority list and the expected airplane orders.
The only reason I would have "willingly quit" UAL would have come from crossing the 85 picket line (I didn't BTW I carried a sign until the last day). UAL, especially in the early day after the strike, was a horrible place for scabs to work. Frankly I don't know how they stayed with us.
Moving on, any more questions?
How about you, have you ever really walked a picket line at UAL (or anywhere else) or just talk tough about it?
"Did you willingly quit United to go to work for Continental? "
What? Where did you get that idea?
How do I say this nicely? When I got hired by UAL in late 70s CAL was my second choice. They had a reputation on the West Coast that was above everyone. I applied and UAL called and this is where I've been since.
If I had been hired at CAL I'd been a "crawl back" who held out until the end from the strike of 83. Had I been looking for a job CAL would have been my last choice up until the Bethune era. In the past few years (prior to the merge) I have been encouraging the young pilot I know looking for a job to apply at CAL because of the age of the Seniority list and the expected airplane orders.
The only reason I would have "willingly quit" UAL would have come from crossing the 85 picket line (I didn't BTW I carried a sign until the last day). UAL, especially in the early day after the strike, was a horrible place for scabs to work. Frankly I don't know how they stayed with us.
Moving on, any more questions?
How about you, have you ever really walked a picket line at UAL (or anywhere else) or just talk tough about it?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
