Originally Posted by
Lambourne
First I think the CAL pilot are grasping at straws and will wind up making an attorney rich if they contribute. It is their money and they can throw it away if they wish.
However, it appears you are treating this suit with a double standard. You thought Craig Gullaksen was akin to MLK for his lawsuit. Yet the CAL pilots need to acknowledge their logic is flawed and unreasonable. Perhaps both the CAL pilots and Craig Gullaksen can buy a billboard by the Hyatt at ORD and post their....what did you call it "mea culpa"?
Well, I must admit I am pleased to see that we can find some common ground with regards to the CAL pilots grasping at straws, but sadly I must disagree with your logic regarding "double standards".
There are two separate issues at hand. One being the merits of the lawsuits and the other being the rights of the individuals to pursue a legal remedy. In the case of Craig's lawsuit I was clear from the beginning that I felt the case was logically flawed, had no merit, would quickly be dismissed, and was divisive to the pilot group as a whole. This is the same sentiment I expressed in my comment above regarding the Legacy CAL lawsuit. The MLK reference, to which you have thrice now harkened back, was written in a post regarding the personal attack on Craig. Both the signatories to Craig's lawsuit and the signatories to the Legacy CAL lawsuit are minorities in the ISL process and if they feel they have been wronged then they have every legal right to pursue a remedy. I do not look upon them with any less respect because they chose to hire a lawyer. I am saddened by the efforts, and I feel strongly they will not succeed, but I did not impugn Craig's person for his efforts, nor did I impugn the Legacy CAL pilots personally in my post above. Iin that sense I find my standards to be the same in both cases.