![]() |
A little advise from a TWAer
USAir East/West you better get your **** together because APA is the enemy. Take a look at the TWA deal--expect that if not worse. If you do better than consider yourselves lucky....
|
Originally Posted by TWA4ME
(Post 1670260)
USAir East/West you better get your **** together because APA is the enemy. Take a look at the TWA deal--expect that if not worse. If you do better than consider yourselves lucky....
|
Wow, nice second post!
|
Originally Posted by TWA4ME
(Post 1670260)
USAir East/West you better get your **** together because APA is the enemy. Take a look at the TWA deal--expect that if not worse. If you do better than consider yourselves lucky....
No rational person wants to see one side.........ANY SIDE control the others or muzzle their ability to bargain and/or argue their position in arbitration. I understand your anger and dissent, but the claim above can only be seen as unnecessarily inflammatory. |
You can thank TWA for McCaskill-Bond;)
Yup but guess what? McCaskill-Bond DOES NOT APPLY under "single carrier status"--that is why APA is fighting for it. You better do you homework...
|
Wow, such bombastic talk -- from every side. "The Enemy." Really????
Merriam-Webster defines "enemy" as: : someone who hates another : someone who attacks or tries to harm another : something that harms or threatens someone or something : a group of people (such as a nation) against whom another group is fighting a war While all this antagonistic language certainly stirs emotion, it really does not do anything else constructive... I'm fairly certain that I am not engaged in armed struggle (war) with the APA. I'm also fairly certain that APA is not hell-bent on hurting me. Finally, I do not think that APA is "attacking" or "attempting to harm" me. Certainly they are looking to best represent their own members (which, at the moment, does not include me). However, everyone keeps forgetting one very important point -- once they become our CBA, they IMMEDIATELY have a duty to fairly represent all of their members (including me). As long as they are not our CBA, they have no such duty. Thus, if they administer a beating while separate CBA's, we have no recourse. Their latest proposal seems to be a not bad deal -- we get our own representation while they then acquire a legal obligation to look out for all their members. Maybe we should also tone down the emotion-based rhetoric and work to find the "best" solution (using rational methods and empirical data) that will convince the arbitrators to a fair solution. We can throw rocks and call names all day on the internet, but will that really accomplish anything??? APA may be my adversary or opponent. But, "enemy?" Please... |
Originally Posted by TWA4ME
(Post 1670284)
Yup but guess what? McCaskill-Bond DOES NOT APPLY under "single carrier status"--that is why APA is fighting for it. You better do you homework...
Throwing a wrench in this SLI won't change the past and if the spirit and intent of the MOU is followed, this SLI won't put another skeleton next to the once you're presently dancing with. |
Let's rehash the topic in a year from now. I hope I'm wrong and you get a fair deal... best of luck!
|
Originally Posted by TWA4ME
(Post 1670260)
USAir East/West you better get your **** together because APA is the enemy. Take a look at the TWA deal--expect that if not worse. If you do better than consider yourselves lucky....
|
Well said TWA. Everyone thinks they deserve better than DOH.
I expect much less, so the longer this gets delayed the better. Cacti, you are a great source of amusement, you are 757 International Captain with a 1998 hire. You expect APA to merge you in with there 1990 hire captains. LOL |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:22 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands