Originally Posted by
N993T
-snip-
When a CEO replies all and says he wants resignations over negative commentary, I consider it a nasty-gram. But let's not split hairs over nomenclature. We could also argue over the implications of such an email chain until we're blue in the face. "Hey guys, no other 135 offers such benefits. So why would you expect them?" Yeah, that's how a decent 135 becomes a scumbag 135. Benefits are usually the first to go. But maybe I "took the email out of context" lol
Not sure who responded like a child. I'm assuming you meant the CEO? Or the pilots that said inappropriate things via email? Either is inexcusable.
Defend the CEOs response all you want, normal employees won't stand for that crap. It's a morale killer. Not to mention way more expensive premiums. I won't rehash the other things you apparently can't substantiate here. Like slower hiring, routes not being renewed. Etc.