Airline Pilot Forums

Airline Pilot Forums was designed to be a community where working airline pilots can share ideas and information about the aviation field. In the forum you will find information about major and regional airline carriers, career training, interview and job seeker help, finance, and living the airline pilot lifestyle.




View Full Version : Me too.....?


Bestglide
04-27-2018, 12:45 PM
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/flight-attendant-sues-skywest-airlines-over-alleged-drugging-rape-by-captain-during-layover/
I’m speechless....


Check Complete
04-27-2018, 01:35 PM
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/flight-attendant-sues-skywest-airlines-over-alleged-drugging-rape-by-captain-during-layover/
I’m speechless....

I know both the people this concerns and the way the company operates.

I have no idea if any or all the allegations are true or not but I am certain she will not be employed here within 6 months.

Mercyful Fate
04-27-2018, 01:38 PM
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/flight-attendant-sues-skywest-airlines-over-alleged-drugging-rape-by-captain-during-layover/
I’m speechless....


Yea, this whole thing reeks of "there is a lot more to this story"


Strenyakov
04-27-2018, 07:34 PM
"He drugged me."
1. What was the drug?
1a. Why don't you know?
1b. What do you think the drug might be? Why?
1c. Were you drinking that night? What? How much?
1d. Do you have a drinking problem? How often do you drink?
1e. What were you drinking? What was he drinking?
1f. If you were to learn that the records of the bar showed that you had X drinks, would you have any reason dispute that?
1g. If you drank X drinks, do you think that would make you drunk?
1h. Have you ever had X drinks in a single night before?
1i. Who paid for your drinks?
1j. If this wasn't a date why would he be paying for the drinks?
1k. Who paid for the tickets to the hockey game?

2. Where would he get the drug?
3. Wouldn't it be a great risk for a pilot to cross into Canada, and back, with a date-rape drug?
4. Isn't the minimum penalty for possession of Rohypnol going into Canada 1 year in prison?
5. Isn't the penalty for simple possession of Rohypnol in the US a maximum of 3 years under federal law? And more in some states?

6. Have you ever made accusations of sexual assault in the past?

"Skywest must pay"

7. Why do you think Skywest should have any liability?
8. Did you know the captain was married before you went on this date? Why did you go?
9. What could Skywest have done?
10. Should Skywest prohibit crew members from going out together on layovers?
11.Why do you want Skywest punished, but not the person you say raped you?
12. Why did you wait several days before making a police report?
13. Why did the Edmonton police refuse to make an arrest?
14. You said you knew immediately when you woke up that you had been raped and drugged; why did you not go to be tested? Rohypnol can be detected in the blood for 60 hours, why was none detected? Why did you wait over 60 hours to be tested?
15. You went to court to get a restraining order against the Captain? Why did the judge refuse to give you the order?
16. When the police did not have enough evidence to do anything, when the court refused your requests, when you failed to gather evidence of being drugged, why should Skywest punish the Captain when he claims your interaction was consensual?

Floy
04-27-2018, 07:53 PM
"He drugged me."
1. What was the drug?
1a. Why don't you know?
1b. What do you think the drug might be? Why?
1c. Were you drinking that night? What? How much?
1d. Do you have a drinking problem? How often do you drink?
1e. What were you drinking? What was he drinking?
1f. If you were to learn that the records of the bar showed that you had X drinks, would you have any reason dispute that?
1g. If you drank X drinks, do you think that would make you drunk?
1h. Have you ever had X drinks in a single night before?
1i. Who paid for your drinks?
1j. If this wasn't a date why would he be paying for the drinks?
1k. Who paid for the tickets to the hockey game?

2. Where would he get the drug?
3. Wouldn't it be a great risk for a pilot to cross into Canada, and back, with a date-rape drug?
4. Isn't the minimum penalty for possession of Rohypnol going into Canada 1 year in prison?
5. Isn't the penalty for simple possession of Rohypnol in the US a maximum of 3 years under federal law? And more in some states?

6. Have you ever made accusations of sexual assault in the past?

"Skywest must pay"

7. Why do you think Skywest should have any liability?
8. Did you know the captain was married before you went on this date? Why did you go?
9. What could Skywest have done?
10. Should Skywest prohibit crew members from going out together on layovers?
11.Why do you want Skywest punished, but not the person you say raped you?
12. Why did you wait several days before making a police report?
13. Why did the Edmonton police refuse to make an arrest?
14. You said you knew immediately when you woke up that you had been raped and drugged; why did you not go to be tested? Rohypnol can be detected in the blood for 60 hours, why was none detected? Why did you wait over 60 hours to be tested?
15. You went to court to get a restraining order against the Captain? Why did the judge refuse to give you the order?
16. When the police did not have enough evidence to do anything, when the court refused your requests, when you failed to gather evidence of being drugged, why should Skywest punish the Captain when he claims your interaction was consensual?

You sound as if you have some knowledge...

MolineCFI
04-27-2018, 08:01 PM
I know of a male flight attendant who made similar charges. He went out drinking with the CA and one of the female FAs and then all went back to his room. He fell asleep and woke up to see the CA and FA fooling around. They left.

The next morning he was not there at show time, did not answer the phone or his door. He finally went down stairs at departure time. He missed the flight. Later he was taking to the hotel van driver and suddenly made the claim that "maybe the captain drugged and raped me?" Van driver told him to go to the hospital to be tested, he didn't. The airline put him on the same flight then next morning to fly back to base.

The next morning the FA again was not in the lobby at show time and again came down at departure time, so he missed the flight again.

Does anyone believe he was raped by the Captain? The Captain was lucky to have spent the night with an alibi.

Once I hear someone say, "he drugged me," my credibility meter goes down by 95%. It sounds like a person who takes no personal responsibility for their own decisions. If they say, "I drank too much and this is what happened" I would tend to believe whatever comes next.

Floy
04-27-2018, 10:08 PM
What if they didn’t drink too much?

What would you say if your daughter told you that? Or your sister? Or your mom?

If someone has firsthand knowledge please share. Otherwise maybe we should withhold judgment just a little while

calmwinds
04-28-2018, 02:49 AM
You sound as if you have some knowledge...

Pilots need to remember that everything they post on this forum can result in their identity being unmasked if a subpoena shows up. Nothing here is anonymous.

gojo
04-28-2018, 04:34 AM
What if they didn’t drink too much?

What would you say if your daughter told you that? Or your sister? Or your mom?

If someone has firsthand knowledge please share. Otherwise maybe we should withhold judgment just a little while

Exactly, quite often the victim gets victimized even more. Didn’t work out too well for Bill Cosby. People should be made accountable for their actions. And hopefully the claims made here are real. If not it’ll be pretty damaging to the Captain. But some of these responses are exactly why people are afraid to report these kind of crimes

Poser765
04-28-2018, 10:31 AM
Once I hear someone say, "he drugged me," my credibility meter goes down by 95%. It sounds like a person who takes no personal responsibility for their own decisions. If they say, "I drank too much and this is what happened" I would tend to believe whatever comes next.I'm kind of in the same boat. It's way too easy to evade personal responsibility with this sort of claim. Unfortunately it DOES happen... People do use drug to rape others, so a claim like this must be taken seriously.

There is a very fine line to walk between taking it seriously and protecting innocent until proven guilty.

It's also really poor taste to name the alleged perpetrator in a news article. It's a one sided claim that levels an accusation that will be hard to bounce back from. Guess what. Pilot recruiters use Google. His name will be googled and this story will pop up. I guarantee if this story is found to be false or she withdraws her accusations the news site will not run a follow up or correction.

rickair7777
04-28-2018, 12:14 PM
Guilty or innocent, the accused will be lucky to keep his job, and his upward mobility is now zero.

If you have sex with someone under these kinds of circumstance, it's going to be impossible to prove your innocence. Something to keep in mind. Misunderstandings can happen, and there's the remote possibility of an intentional set up if there are deep pockets anywhere in sight.

Floy
04-28-2018, 01:26 PM
All good points but lets be clear. There is no "personal responsibility" here. I have a right to drink too much and not wake up naked in bed next to someone that I didn't expressly agree to wake up next to.

My wife, daughters, mother, and sister all have a right to behave as they wish and not end up as victims. I wonder how many times I might have been taken advantage of if everytime in my youth that I drank too much I had to pay the price.

The responsibility is on US. The males to not behave like chimps. Scratch that...even apes dont do that to each other.

I dont know a thing about this case. Neither party should have been named. Thats bad. But the immediate response to blame the victim as if she doesnt have the right to go out with a guy, party and maybe even drink too much, without getting raped is the exact reason for the backlash that has all men on their heels right now.

I take responsibility. To act like a professional. I dont go out with any crewmember unless all are present. I wouldn't date where I work etc.

I hope the truth of this nasty thing comes out. But don't assume that if any woman ends up naked, bruised, and sexually assaulted, that they should have had better "personal responsibilty".

TimetoClimb
04-28-2018, 01:36 PM
Three rules guys, just three!


Don't talk to reporters

Don't cross the picketline

Don't dip your stick in the company soup!

Excargodog
04-28-2018, 01:57 PM
Neither party should have been named. Thats bad.

Good, bad, coulda, shoulda, woulda, - that isn't today's reality. The woman is suing the company under a Washington State law - the same one that the FO at Alaska is using, that holds employers responsible for assuring that junior people aren't sexually harassed by their supervisors. This is civil litigation and the standard of proof is far lower than in a criminal proceedings. AND IT IS IN THE COMMON DOMAIN, that is anyone can pull up the case filings.

And I think it is pretty much like Rickair states, while your PRESENT company may stick by you, because it is in their interests to do so, you have now become radioactive. Why should a major accept the risk of hiring a guy who has had one such allegation against him? Because even if the guy was innocent, he will already have one strike against him if this happens again, and clearly he MIGHT have done it and be prone to doing it again. Why take the chance?

Gentlemen, no rational guy in this day and age ought to be taking the professional risk of these type of relationships on layovers. Even if it's just a total misunderstanding, your future career could easily take a lethal hit.

Poser765
04-28-2018, 03:06 PM
All good points but lets be clear. There is no "personal responsibility" here. I have a right to drink too much and not wake up naked in bed next to someone that I didn't expressly agree to wake up next to.

My wife, daughters, mother, and sister all have a right to behave as they wish and not end up as victims. I wonder how many times I might have been taken advantage of if everytime in my youth that I drank too much I had to pay the price.

The responsibility is on US. The males to not behave like chimps. Scratch that...even apes dont do that to each other.

I dont know a thing about this case. Neither party should have been named. Thats bad. But the immediate response to blame the victim as if she doesnt have the right to go out with a guy, party and maybe even drink too much, without getting raped is the exact reason for the backlash that has all men on their heels right now.

I take responsibility. To act like a professional. I dont go out with any crewmember unless all are present. I wouldn't date where I work etc.

I hope the truth of this nasty thing comes out. But don't assume that if any woman ends up naked, bruised, and sexually assaulted, that they should have had better "personal responsibilty".you grossly misunderstood what I meant when I said personal responsibility. My point that claiming to be drugged is a way to get yourself out of a consensual decision you might later regret. I'm not saying that's the case here. Not at all, and in no way am I victim blaming.

To assume he definitely raped this woman is just as bad as saying she made it up. That's the fine line to walk. All I'm really saying is we shouldn't pass judgment on a man when all we have is a woman's one sided report in a daily news site. He could have a completely different story to tell... And it could be totally full of crap, just like her story.

NeverHome
04-28-2018, 03:55 PM
My wife, daughters, mother, and sister all have a right to behave as they wish and not end up as victims. I wonder how many times I might have been taken advantage of if everytime in my youth that I drank too much I had to pay the price.

The responsibility is on US. The males to not behave like chimps. Scratch that...even apes dont do that to each other.


Gonna disagree here. Nobody has the right to behave any way they wish and not face consequences. Sometimes consequences result in good things. Sometimes not.

Consider this, drinking too much and getting behind the wheel for instance, nobody has that right. Incidentally nobody has the right to enter into an agreement, fulfill that agreement, then lie the next day saying they were never in agreement.

Don’t get me wrong, rape and sexual assault are never okay or agreeable. If the captain did initiate the Cosby 1 arrival than he deserves every thing coming to him. If he did not, then she is now the worst type of human being alive.

Floy
04-28-2018, 05:27 PM
you grossly misunderstood what I meant when I said personal responsibility. My point that claiming to be drugged is a way to get yourself out of a consensual decision you might later regret. I'm not saying that's the case here. Not at all, and in no way am I victim blaming.

To assume he definitely raped this woman is just as bad as saying she made it up. That's the fine line to walk. All I'm really saying is we shouldn't pass judgment on a man when all we have is a woman's one sided report in a daily news site. He could have a completely different story to tell... And it could be totally full of crap, just like her story.

There is no assumption that he definitely raped her, or that she is a vindictive woman scorned. That's the whole point. Earlier there was a reference to a long and drawn out post that put up a point by point argument as to all the myriad reasons one should be skeptical as to why her story is suspect. One of the main points was "personal responsibility".

To immediately suspect either is in poor form. We simply don't know. But if one of the women in my life told me they had been raped after they drank with a friend, I wouldn't berate them for a lack of "personal responsibility". They should be able to drink with a friend without having to worry about being assaulted.

That said I am teaching my two girls never to drink more than one and never to accept a drink that they didn't pour themselves. That's how much I trust my own gender

Floy
04-28-2018, 05:34 PM
Gonna disagree here. Nobody has the right to behave any way they wish and not face consequences. Sometimes consequences result in good things. Sometimes not.

Consider this, drinking too much and getting behind the wheel for instance, nobody has that right. Incidentally nobody has the right to enter into an agreement, fulfill that agreement, then lie the next day saying they were never in agreement.

Don’t get me wrong, rape and sexual assault are never okay or agreeable. If the captain did initiate the Cosby 1 arrival than he deserves every thing coming to him. If he did not, then she is now the worst type of human being alive.

I didn't say anything about putting others in danger simply because you think you have the right to drink then drive. You don't have that right. You do have the right however to go out and drink. To party, to even misbehave. This lack of judgement in no way gives others the right to victimize you simply because of your poor choices.

I am not saying that she is the victim or the perpetrator. Earlier posts went in the default direction of blaming the victim. We don't know what happened but its disgraceful that immediately upon hearing a story like this, all of us in our male superiority start poking holes at the person saying that they were victimized.

I also think that we are all too quick to pass judgement one way or the other. We have no idea what happened.

rickair7777
04-28-2018, 06:03 PM
I also think that we are all too quick to pass judgement one way or the other. We have no idea what happened.

Could be anything from full-on Cosby, to a calculated setup to loot the SGU coffers. Or anything in between.

However... in most cases for normal people the threshold of reporting a rape is pretty high. I think most women would not report it if they had any doubt in their own minds. Possible exception if someone was observed and/or recorded in a very embarrassing situation, some women have been so ashamed they cried rape just to deflect the shame.

But in cases where nobody would have otherwise known anything happened, I think a woman would have to be pretty sure of what happened to report it. That's a major and painful step.

Very rare exceptions for shame deflection and premeditated scam. I tend to give benefit of the doubt to the woman unless there's evidence to the contrary. But the alleged perp still gets all the usual legal protections... I can believe the victim fully, but still believe the perp should not be punished based on weak evidence. That's the hard part about these cases... it's difficult to achieve the required or even a reasonable standard of proof. You can't convict someone with no proof, and probably shouldn't fire them either, although the threshold for firing or other employer action is probably lower than even civil preponderance of evidence.

OOfff
04-28-2018, 09:51 PM
Gonna disagree here. Nobody has the right to behave any way they wish and not face consequences. Sometimes consequences result in good things. Sometimes not.

Could you give us an example of behavior a woman could exhibit that would strip her of her right not to be assaulted?

Bestglide
04-29-2018, 05:18 AM
I didn't say anything about putting others in danger simply because you think you have the right to drink then drive. You don't have that right. You do have the right however to go out and drink. To party, to even misbehave. This lack of judgement in no way gives others the right to victimize you simply because of your poor choices.

I am not saying that she is the victim or the perpetrator. Earlier posts went in the default direction of blaming the victim. We don't know what happened but its disgraceful that immediately upon hearing a story like this, all of us in our male superiority start poking holes at the person saying that they were victimized.

I also think that we are all too quick to pass judgement one way or the other. We have no idea what happened.

I wouldn’t call it “male superiority”as that statement is sexist in of itself.
I get that you have females in your life as we all do and are very defensive of them, but to label anyone for their opinion or life experiences is seemingly shallow.
Personally in the realm of my life experiences without knowing the facts I’m more abt to believe as someone stated above that the contract was changed the next morning leaning toward a me too payday. I’ve seen this many times in my career, unfortunately!
But if the said pilot pulled a Cosby in any way he should be prosecuted to the full extent.
The really sad part in all this is that it makes me unwilling to go out with anyone on a layover especially a member of the opposite sex.
Except for people I’ve become friends with over the years and trust.

sailingfun
04-29-2018, 06:03 AM
Delta had a flight attendant accuse a pilot of rape after she failed to make pickup. His entire life hung in the balance until hotel key card data showed her story to be false and when confronted she admitted she fabricated the story to save her job.

NeverHome
04-29-2018, 06:09 AM
Could you give us an example of behavior a woman could exhibit that would strip her of her right not to be assaulted?

I think you needed to finish reading my post. You know, where it says it’s never okay or agreeable to have rape or sexual assault occur. You know, that part.

But again there are consequences for behaviors, good and bad. That’s the point I’m driving at. Incidentally, that’s the very point most individuals miss. In today’s world people need to be cognizant of their actions (both men and women). The biggest F U in the world is this: you will likely never know the consequences of your actions until after the fact.

Mercyful Fate
04-29-2018, 07:36 AM
https://americanaddictioncenters.org/alcoholism-treatment/blackout/


Interesting read, and the results from "blackout drunk" will mimic similar symptoms of a rape drug. A person is still able to function in a blackout state, with no ability to make rational decisions or retain a memory of blocks of time.

It is each persons responsibility to not get to this state. Why? Because getting to this state can cause a person to not make wise decisions, let alone remember what they said or did. A persons credibility absolutely can be questioned if it cannot be proven there was a drug used. Has nothing to do with victim shaming, as proving someone was a victim is impossible if a persons state of being is a result over over consumption of alcohol.

Floy
04-29-2018, 08:36 AM
"He drugged me."
1. What was the drug?
1a. Why don't you know?
1b. What do you think the drug might be? Why?
1c. Were you drinking that night? What? How much?
1d. Do you have a drinking problem? How often do you drink?
1e. What were you drinking? What was he drinking?
1f. If you were to learn that the records of the bar showed that you had X drinks, would you have any reason dispute that?
1g. If you drank X drinks, do you think that would make you drunk?
1h. Have you ever had X drinks in a single night before?
1i. Who paid for your drinks?
1j. If this wasn't a date why would he be paying for the drinks?
1k. Who paid for the tickets to the hockey game?

2. Where would he get the drug?
3. Wouldn't it be a great risk for a pilot to cross into Canada, and back, with a date-rape drug?
4. Isn't the minimum penalty for possession of Rohypnol going into Canada 1 year in prison?
5. Isn't the penalty for simple possession of Rohypnol in the US a maximum of 3 years under federal law? And more in some states?

6. Have you ever made accusations of sexual assault in the past?

"Skywest must pay"

7. Why do you think Skywest should have any liability?
8. Did you know the captain was married before you went on this date? Why did you go?
9. What could Skywest have done?
10. Should Skywest prohibit crew members from going out together on layovers?
11.Why do you want Skywest punished, but not the person you say raped you?
12. Why did you wait several days before making a police report?
13. Why did the Edmonton police refuse to make an arrest?
14. You said you knew immediately when you woke up that you had been raped and drugged; why did you not go to be tested? Rohypnol can be detected in the blood for 60 hours, why was none detected? Why did you wait over 60 hours to be tested?
15. You went to court to get a restraining order against the Captain? Why did the judge refuse to give you the order?
16. When the police did not have enough evidence to do anything, when the court refused your requests, when you failed to gather evidence of being drugged, why should Skywest punish the Captain when he claims your interaction was consensual?

I have been referring, repeatedly to this post in particular and other statements that have explicitly or implicitly placed the blame on the alleged victim.

When you are robbed at gunpoint in your store, you are not asked "why were you open at that time?"

When you are rear ended in your car you are not asked "why were you out driving your car?"

etc etc.

We live in a society where we men have dominated women for thousands of years. Our first reaction as men is to attempt to show why she deserved it or that she in fact may be the perpetrator.

Yet I would wager that the incidence of men being the perpetrators vs women scorned falsely accusing is likely 1000 to 1.

We don't know what happened. They both deserve to be able to tell the story. If he were falsely accused I hope he is able through channels, to seek compensation. But I am tired of hearing all the reasons that a woman actions prove she was not assaulted. An explicit yes is required period. A "contract" as you call it can not be entered in to when you are drunk. If the person assuming the contract has been made moves upon that assumption, they have committed a crime. Where are you guys talking about a man's responsibility to ensure that his partner is willing when she is fall down drunk and semi unresponsive? Yet that is the assumption all the same. She was half asleep and didn't say no. Therefore we males assume a binding agreement. Regardless of having women in my life whom I am protective of, I call BS on that.

I am now going back to lurking and will end on that note. Its been an enlightening discussion

Mercyful Fate
04-29-2018, 08:39 AM
I have been referring, repeatedly to this post in particular and other statements that have explicitly or implicitly placed the blame on the alleged victim.

When you are robbed at gunpoint in your store, you are not asked "why were you open at that time?"

When you are rear ended in your car you are not asked "why were you out driving your car?"

etc etc.

We live in a society where we men have dominated women for thousands of years. Our first reaction as men is to attempt to show why she deserved it or that she in fact may be the perpetrator.

Yet I would wager that the incidence of men being the perpetrators vs women scorned falsely accusing is likely 1000 to 1.

We don't know what happened. They both deserve to be able to tell the story. If he were falsely accused I hope he is able through channels, to seek compensation. But I am tired of hearing all the reasons that a woman actions prove she was not assaulted. An explicit yes is required period. A "contract" as you call it can not be entered in to when you are drunk. If the person assuming the contract has been made moves upon that assumption, they have committed a crime. Where are you guys talking about a man's responsibility to ensure that his partner is willing when she is fall down drunk and semi unresponsive? Yet that is the assumption all the same. She was half asleep and didn't say no. Therefore we males assume a binding agreement. Regardless of having women in my life whom I am protective of, I call BS on that.

I am now going back to lurking and will end on that note. Its been an enlightening discussion

Yea go back to lurking. Your perspective is entirely based on emotion, which is not a good thing.

sailingfun
04-29-2018, 09:41 AM
I have been referring, repeatedly to this post in particular and other statements that have explicitly or implicitly placed the blame on the alleged victim.

When you are robbed at gunpoint in your store, you are not asked "why were you open at that time?"

When you are rear ended in your car you are not asked "why were you out driving your car?"

etc etc.

We live in a society where we men have dominated women for thousands of years. Our first reaction as men is to attempt to show why she deserved it or that she in fact may be the perpetrator.

Yet I would wager that the incidence of men being the perpetrators vs women scorned falsely accusing is likely 1000 to 1.

We don't know what happened. They both deserve to be able to tell the story. If he were falsely accused I hope he is able through channels, to seek compensation. But I am tired of hearing all the reasons that a woman actions prove she was not assaulted. An explicit yes is required period. A "contract" as you call it can not be entered in to when you are drunk. If the person assuming the contract has been made moves upon that assumption, they have committed a crime. Where are you guys talking about a man's responsibility to ensure that his partner is willing when she is fall down drunk and semi unresponsive? Yet that is the assumption all the same. She was half asleep and didn't say no. Therefore we males assume a binding agreement. Regardless of having women in my life whom I am protective of, I call BS on that.

I am now going back to lurking and will end on that note. Its been an enlightening discussion

Keep in mind that if youre robbed you will have to produce or have evidence of that. You can’t simply state John Doe robbed me and expect him to be locked away and his life destroyed based on your statement alone.

Mercyful Fate
04-29-2018, 09:55 AM
Keep in mind that if youre robbed you will have to produce or have evidence of that. You can’t simply state John Doe robbed me and expect him to be locked away and his life destroyed based on your statement alone.

I would take it a step further and say, comparing a robbery to this situation is comparing apples to oranges.

Excargodog
04-29-2018, 10:03 AM
Keep in mind that if youre robbed you will have to produce or have evidence of that. You can’t simply state John Doe robbed me and expect him to be locked away and his life destroyed based on your statement alone.

But this isn't about being locked up. This is a civil suit with discovery and a whole different set of rules of engagement. And the criteria for guilt is far lower, basically more probable than not. But that's just the legal part.

But the stakes are even higher for the accused and even winning the case may not be enough to undo the damage. Doesn't matter if you think that's fair or not. It's reality.

Unless he can prove his innocence the likelihood of his career continuing to progress to a major has just about vanished. What major wants - or needs - to take a chance on someone who has already been accused of non consensual sex by one coworker? That person is already damaged goods.

Anyone sleeping with a subordinate on a trip is tossing the dice for a career-ending incident. Doesn't matter if he was wrong, she was wrong, both were drunk, if it was a misunderstanding, or delayed remorse....

Your hope of a career in the majors will be a mort if it happens to you.

rickair7777
04-29-2018, 11:13 AM
But this isn't about being locked up. This is a civil suit with discovery and a whole different set of rules of engagement. And the criteria for guilt is far lower, basically more probable than not. But that's just the legal part.

But the stakes are even higher for the accused and even winning the case may not be enough to undo the damage. Doesn't matter if you think that's fair or not. It's reality.

Unless he can prove his innocence the likelihood of his career continuing to progress to a major has just about vanished. What major wants - or needs - to take a chance on someone who has already been accused of non consensual sex by one coworker? That person is already damaged goods.

Anyone sleeping with a subordinate on a trip is tossing the dice for a career-ending incident. Doesn't matter if he was wrong, she was wrong, both were drunk, if it was a misunderstanding, or delayed remorse....

Your hope of a career in the majors will be a mort if it happens to you.

He can't win, already too late. Even if she confesses on live TV to making the whole thing up, he's still radioactive to the majors.

OOfff
04-29-2018, 12:33 PM
I think you needed to finish reading my post. You know, where it says it’s never okay or agreeable to have rape or sexual assault occur. You know, that part.

But again there are consequences for behaviors, good and bad. That’s the point I’m driving at. Incidentally, that’s the very point most individuals miss. In today’s world people need to be cognizant of their actions (both men and women). The biggest F U in the world is this: you will likely never know the consequences of your actions until after the fact.

Why even talk about the consequences? You’re just trying to make victim blaming more vague. There is no behavior which justifies or excuses the consequence of getting sexually assaulted. Nobody is missing your point, it’s simply an asinine “point” to be making

NeverHome
04-29-2018, 06:25 PM
Why even talk about the consequences? You’re just trying to make victim blaming more vague. There is no behavior which justifies or excuses the consequence of getting sexually assaulted. Nobody is missing your point, it’s simply an asinine “point” to be making

First off, all adult people must understand consequences. This is important. For both men and women. Going out and having a good time is all well and good, but being cognizant of consequences will help people avoid problems. Its risk mitigation. Threat and error evaluation.

Im guessing your reading comprehension is very poor. No where have I blamed the victim. Not once. Further I’m not trying to make anything vague. Rather I am pointing out a fact that too many people in today’s world is missing. And guess what? If this information were utilized there would be a lot less people in very bad situations. Think about this. Really contemplate this.

I do agree with you, there is no justifiable reason to have anyone sexually assaulted. I have made that clear already.

Lastly, my point is not asinine. Im saying people need to be cognizant of their actions and the consequences that may follow. You know, by stating that adults need to be adults. You however want to dismiss this. That I do not understand.

OOfff
04-29-2018, 07:21 PM
First off, all adult people must understand consequences. This is important. For both men and women. Going out and having a good time is all well and good, but being cognizant of consequences will help people avoid problems. Its risk mitigation. Threat and error evaluation.

Im guessing your reading comprehension is very poor. No where have I blamed the victim. Not once. Further I’m not trying to make anything vague. Rather I am pointing out a fact that too many people in today’s world is missing. And guess what? If this information were utilized there would be a lot less people in very bad situations. Think about this. Really contemplate this.

I do agree with you, there is no justifiable reason to have anyone sexually assaulted. I have made that clear already.

Lastly, my point is not asinine. Im saying people need to be cognizant of their actions and the consequences that may follow. You know, by stating that adults need to be adults. You however want to dismiss this. That I do not understand.

I’m not trying to dismiss it, it simply has no place in a discussion of an alleged rape. No action the alleged victim undertook has any bearing on the alleged rape.

Truthanator
04-29-2018, 07:25 PM
First off, all adult people must understand consequences. This is important. For both men and women. Going out and having a good time is all well and good, but being cognizant of consequences will help people avoid problems. Its risk mitigation. Threat and error evaluation.

Im guessing your reading comprehension is very poor. No where have I blamed the victim. Not once. Further I’m not trying to make anything vague. Rather I am pointing out a fact that too many people in today’s world is missing. And guess what? If this information were utilized there would be a lot less people in very bad situations. Think about this. Really contemplate this.

I do agree with you, there is no justifiable reason to have anyone sexually assaulted. I have made that clear already.

Lastly, my point is not asinine. Im saying people need to be cognizant of their actions and the consequences that may follow. You know, by stating that adults need to be adults. You however want to dismiss this. That I do not understand.

For someone calling out others for reading comprehension, you sure are lacking.

Being victim of rape or sexual assault is not a "consequence" of a victims actions. You clearly aren't getting that. It is a result of a rapists or aggressors actions. You understand the difference between results of others actions versus the consequences of your own actions right?

Rape or sexual assault is not a "consequence" of going out and having a good time.

Try harder.

Rahlifer
04-29-2018, 07:37 PM
Aaaaaaaaaand this is a perfect example of why being a slam-clicker is the best way to conduct oneself on layovers. Regardless of whatever did or didn't happen, it's just not worth losing your job over a he said/ she said situation.

OOfff
04-29-2018, 08:36 PM
Aaaaaaaaaand this is a perfect example of why being a slam-clicker is the best way to conduct oneself on layovers. Regardless of whatever did or didn't happen, it's just not worth losing your job over a he said/ she said situation.
There’s a bit of distance between being completely antisocial and having someone wake up in your bed without recollection of the night’s events

Strenyakov
04-29-2018, 08:54 PM
You sound as if you have some knowledge...

I have no knowledge of the events. I don't know any of the people nor do I know any of the facts other than what the accuser stated. I am just going on what she said and it just does not match with the way people act. She appears devoid of any sense of personal responsibility.

Those are the questions I would ask her. Those are the same questions I would ask my daughter if she had claims like that.

OOfff
04-29-2018, 09:09 PM
I have no knowledge of the events. I don't know any of the people nor do I know any of the facts other than what the accuser stated. I am just going on what she said and it just does not match with the way people act. She appears devoid of any sense of personal responsibility.

Those are the questions I would ask her. Those are the same questions I would ask my daughter if she had claims like that.
Please tell me how much experience you have with how people act and should act in the aftermath of sexual assault

MolineCFI
04-29-2018, 09:24 PM
Why even talk about the consequences? You’re just trying to make victim blaming more vague. There is no behavior which justifies or excuses the consequence of getting sexually assaulted. Nobody is missing your point, it’s simply an asinine “point” to be making

You make the assumption that she was sexually assaulted, when there is more evidence pointing to her having been a participant.

She is obviously not shy about these matters but goes out of her way to tell everyone. She wants to be the center of attention, "look at me, I'm a victim!" Yet she waits until it is too late to preserve evidence that she had been drugged. That was not just evidence that would have shown she was drugged and he was guilty, it was evidence that would show she had not been drugged.

Don't forget the Duke Lacrosse players. The gal made the accusations because she wanted to extort money from the players. The prosector wanted to use the claims to help get reelected. The prosecutor hid the evidence showing the DNA evidence exonerated the accused. The police detective changed the statement of the accuser to match the description of players and to make the claims more believable.

In the end, the accuser went to prison for murdering her boyfriend. The prosecutor was disbarred and went to jail. The police detective committed suicide. The lacrosse players were paid 20 million by the university for punishing the players without any evidence.

OOfff
04-30-2018, 02:37 AM
You make the assumption that she was sexually assaulted, when there is more evidence pointing to her having been a participant.
what evidence, exactly?


She is obviously not shy about these matters but goes out of her way to tell everyone. She wants to be the center of attention, "look at me, I'm a victim!" Yet she waits until it is too late to preserve evidence that she had been drugged. That was not just evidence that would have shown she was drugged and he was guilty, it was evidence that would show she had not been drugged.
So, you’re going to double down on the blaming the (possible, alleged) victim of sexual assault for not acting the way you think they should act, ignoring the fact that women often don’t act perfectly rationally after traumatic assaults.


Don't forget the Duke Lacrosse players. The gal made the accusations because she wanted to extort money from the players. The prosector wanted to use the claims to help get reelected. The prosecutor hid the evidence showing the DNA evidence exonerated the accused. The police detective changed the statement of the accuser to match the description of players and to make the claims more believable.




In the end, the accuser went to prison for murdering her boyfriend. The prosecutor was disbarred and went to jail. The police detective committed suicide. The lacrosse players were paid 20 million by the university for punishing the players without any evidence.
Misdirection/red herrings do no good. This person has nothing to do with duke as far as any of us know, except that she shares a gender with the accuser.

rickair7777
04-30-2018, 04:01 AM
Aaaaaaaaaand this is a perfect example of why being a slam-clicker is the best way to conduct oneself on layovers. Regardless of whatever did or didn't happen, it's just not worth losing your job over a he said/ she said situation.

You don't have to slam click, just follow two rules...

Don't be alone in a bedroom ever with anyone that you're not really good friends with. Not even for a moment.

If the drinking pushes your comfort level (or company/FAA limits), leave and suggest everyone else knock it off too. You can get in trouble for even being aware that other crew violated alcohol limits, but if you walk away before it gets out of hand, you have plausible deniability.

Rahlifer
04-30-2018, 04:36 AM
You don't have to slam click, just follow two rules...

Don't be alone in a bedroom ever with anyone that you're not really good friends with. Not even for a moment.

If the drinking pushes your comfort level (or company/FAA limits), leave and suggest everyone else knock it off too. You can get in trouble for even being aware that other crew violated alcohol limits, but if you walk away before it gets out of hand, you have plausible deniability.

Slam-clicking reduces the need for setting up an alibi. It’s a job, not a frat party. I can actually go four days without alcohol, unlike most regional pilots. 🙄🙄

GogglesPisano
04-30-2018, 07:17 AM
Words matter. Despite what some attorney may say, this is an alleged sexual assault. And despite the fact that several posters on this thread would prefer the opposite, we still have due process in this country (for now.) This guy's life is being ruined with no proof.

Let's let it play out in court, not the court of APC.

C130driver
04-30-2018, 07:24 AM
Good, bad, coulda, shoulda, woulda, - that isn't today's reality. The woman is suing the company under a Washington State law - the same one that the FO at Alaska is using, that holds employers responsible for assuring that junior people aren't sexually harassed by their supervisors. This is civil litigation and the standard of proof is far lower than in a criminal proceedings. AND IT IS IN THE COMMON DOMAIN, that is anyone can pull up the case filings.

And I think it is pretty much like Rickair states, while your PRESENT company may stick by you, because it is in their interests to do so, you have now become radioactive. Why should a major accept the risk of hiring a guy who has had one such allegation against him? Because even if the guy was innocent, he will already have one strike against him if this happens again, and clearly he MIGHT have done it and be prone to doing it again. Why take the chance?

Gentlemen, no rational guy in this day and age ought to be taking the professional risk of these type of relationships on layovers. Even if it's just a total misunderstanding, your future career could easily take a lethal hit.

Absolutely correct; whether he is 100% guilty or innocent, he’s effed. The woman is always right, especially in states like WA. His name will get dragged through the mud even if he is innocent.

LNL76
04-30-2018, 08:11 AM
You don't have to slam click, just follow two rules...

Don't be alone in a bedroom ever with anyone that you're not really good friends with. Not even for a moment.

If the drinking pushes your comfort level (or company/FAA limits), leave and suggest everyone else knock it off too. You can get in trouble for even being aware that other crew violated alcohol limits, but if you walk away before it gets out of hand, you have plausible deniability.

Agreed, 100%. :)

NeverHome
04-30-2018, 08:41 AM
For someone calling out others for reading comprehension, you sure are lacking.

Being victim of rape or sexual assault is not a "consequence" of a victims actions. You clearly aren't getting that. It is a result of a rapists or aggressors actions. You understand the difference between results of others actions versus the consequences of your own actions right?

Rape or sexual assault is not a "consequence" of going out and having a good time.

Try harder.

My comprehension is spot on. Also, in what has been released to the media, the FA was willingly out with the CA. In fact it is reported they both love hockey. So ask yourself this, would her “rape” have occurred if she had simply went to her room and went to bed?

Would anything that could remotely be viewed as sexual assault occurred if she had gone to her room and called it a night?

Hard truth: If you go out and have a good time, there is a level of risk. That risk can very well lead to negative consequences. Soooooooo, mitigate that risk. Consider negative outcomes of any activity you engage in.

Lastly until this case is either tried, settles, or dismissed- it would be appropriate to not cast blame and make judgment. Just because somebody screams rape, does not mean anything has happened.

Rahlifer
04-30-2018, 09:33 AM
Words matter. Despite what some attorney may say, this is an alleged sexual assault. And despite the fact that several posters on this thread would prefer the opposite, we still have due process in this country (for now.) This guy's life is being ruined with no proof.

Let's let it play out in court, not the court of APC.

The facts of the case are completely irrelevant. Once an allegation is made, it’s game-over. He might keep his job if found innocent, but his only other career options will be some fly by night south Florida operator. I’ve been around long enough to witness many pilots throw away their careers over pure stupidity on overnights.

Excargodog
04-30-2018, 09:56 AM
Hard truth: If you go out and have a good time, there is a level of risk. That risk can very well lead to negative consequences. Soooooooo, mitigate that risk. Consider negative outcomes of any activity you engage in.


Absolutely, and if "going out and having a good time" means having sex with a coworker - especially a subordinate coworker - on a layover, those negative consequences will likely include the end of any chance of career progression for one or more of the persons involved if any disagreement arises in the relationship whatsoever. And if only one career goes down the tubes it is most likely going to be that of the male. Doesn't matter if it ever makes it to a court of law or not. If it becomes public at all, chances for career advancement will likely diminish to zero.

Doesn't matter if you personally believe that's fair or not, that is the reality.

rickair7777
04-30-2018, 11:46 AM
The facts of the case are completely irrelevant. Once an allegation is made, it’s game-over. He might keep his job if found innocent, but his only other career options will be some fly by night south Florida operator. I’ve been around long enough to witness many pilots throw away their careers over pure stupidity on overnights.

He's not going to be "found innocent". Is he even named in the lawsuit or has he been charged with anything? If the lawsuit is resolved in his favor, and he is found not guilty at a criminal trial, that just means there wasn't enough evidence, it does not mean he's innocent.

Some courts can issue an declaration of innocence to help clear the accused's reputation, but that's only done where innocence is actually proven as fact (not the same as "not guilty" by a long stretch). The standards for that are very high... reliable witness testimony, video tapes, etc.

NeverHome
04-30-2018, 01:39 PM
Absolutely, and if "going out and having a good time" means having sex with a coworker - especially a subordinate coworker - on a layover, those negative consequences will likely include the end of any chance of career progression for one or more of the persons involved if any disagreement arises in the relationship whatsoever. And if only one career goes down the tubes it is most likely going to be that of the male. Doesn't matter if it ever makes it to a court of law or not. If it becomes public at all, chances for career advancement will likely diminish to zero.

Doesn't matter if you personally believe that's fair or not, that is the reality.

Yes, you have nailed it! 100% Reality doesn’t always follow what we want or believe to be right.

Check Complete
04-30-2018, 02:54 PM
It just seems unusual to directly name the alleged assailent in the news article. Should the suit be dismissed or found he is innocent could he have her charged with slander?

calmwinds
04-30-2018, 05:13 PM
It just seems unusual to directly name the alleged assailent in the news article. Should the suit be dismissed or found he is innocent could he have her charged with slander?

If you read the comment above, courts don’t usually find innocence. He would have to have video tape or hard proof she is directly lying. And, alleged assailents, unless they are minors, are named all the time. Usually, the victims are protected but she let her name be used.

Usually, it is frowned upon for someone’s supervisor to crawl in the sack with an subordinate, even if consensual. On this trip, he is her supervisor. If she can prove even consensual occurred, I am sure that SkyWest will feel some financial pain.

Excargodog
04-30-2018, 05:31 PM
It just seems unusual to directly name the alleged assailent in the news article. Should the suit be dismissed or found he is innocent could he have her charged with slander?

There is no federal criminal libel or slander law, and only nine states now have them. Washington is not one of those states. And even in those states, criminal actions are rare, less than five a year nationwide. He could of course sue her for libel or slander in civil court, but that essentially reverses the situation, in that he must then somehow be able to prove that she not only wasn't raped by him, but actually knew she hadn't been raped and was claiming she had been raped knowingly and with malicious intent.

And since he would be bringing this second cause of action, he would essentially be financing another publicity campaign that would AGAIN hilight all of her allegations. It is not impossible for him to win, but highly unlikely since the judge will be spring loaded to not make any rulings that could even conceivably be twisted to claim that he was setting any precedent that would deter a sexual assault victim from coming forward (Washington Superior Court judges have to stand for election) and the jury - particularly in King County - would be leaning the same way.

So, yeah, he can finance a second case that would double down on the adverse PR, but he's highly unlikely to win it, and he'll be paying lawyer and court costs while the woman (any woman) will either be represented pro bono by a "socially conscious" Seattle legal practice Senior Partner, or have her lawyer fees paid by any of a number of feminist groups in King county or simply crowdsourcing whatever it costs her.

Time to face facts, guys, the era when you could get away with "what goes on on layovers, stays on layovers," is OVER. You put your career on the line anytime you make any sexual overtures to another employee. That's just a fact, and if either is even a little impaired, the odds for a misunderstanding go up immensely.

Coffee, tea, or me, was a work of FICTION:

https://books.google.com/books/about/Coffee_Tea_Or_Me.html?id=vNSBNrnhWf8C&printsec=frontcover&source=kp_read_button

But even if it hadn't been, that was then and this is now.

rickair7777
04-30-2018, 07:47 PM
Coffee, tea, or me, was a work of FICTION:

No it wasn't.


But even if it hadn't been, that was then and this is now.

But this is correct. Back then girls having sex was considered to be symbolic of liberation. Today it's considered a symptom of male domination/privilege.

BeatNavy
04-30-2018, 08:40 PM
If you read the comment above, courts don’t usually find innocence. He would have to have video tape or hard proof she is directly lying. And, alleged assailents, unless they are minors, are named all the time. Usually, the victims are protected but she let her name be used.

Usually, it is frowned upon for someone’s supervisor to crawl in the sack with an subordinate, even if consensual. On this trip, he is her supervisor. If she can prove even consensual occurred, I am sure that SkyWest will feel some financial pain.

I don’t know how you guys do things at SkyWest, but a CA is not a flight attendant’s supervisor on a layover. A CA doesn’t write performance reports for FAs, hire/fire FAs, or act as a supervisor in any way, except while working on the clock and on the aircraft. Once the duty clock stops and flight duties are over, they are just two employees on a layover. An airline captain is a Pilot in Command, not a chaperone in command.

Excargodog
04-30-2018, 09:15 PM
No it wasn't.


That seems to be disputable, at least according to Wikipedia:

Donald Bain revealed in his 2002 memoir Every Midget Has an Uncle Sam Costume: Writing for a Living that he wrote Coffee, Tea or Me? and three sequels while employed as a New York City-based American Airlines public relations person.[1] The publisher hired two Eastern Airlines stewardesses to pose as the authors for book tours and television appearances.[1] As The New York Times columnist Joe Sharkey described in 2010,

An editor at a publishing house introduced him to two Eastern Airlines stewardesses who thought they together might be able to write a book about their escapades. The editor thought Don might want to be the ghostwriter for the two women. But when Don sat down with them, they didn't have much to offer besides a few anecdotes. "I realized they didn't have enough to sustain a book, and I was going to have to use an awful lot of my own imagination," he told me then. Nevertheless, he was inspired by the idea. So he created a "memoir" out of whole cloth. The book shot onto the best-seller list, and the two stewardesses were delighted to go on the road to publicize it as the authors -- even though their real names were not on the cover. Bedazzled by fame, "one of them legally changed her real name to the one I had given her on the book," Bain told me.[1]

Bain himself said, "I wrote it in 1966 while working in public relations for American Airlines, and it went on to spawn an entire genre of wacky comedies, including three direct sequels. All in all, the four books sold more than five million copies worldwide, and became my annuity for almost 17 years.[2]

The Bartholomew House Ltd., a division of Bartell Media Corporation, published a hardcover edition in October 1967,[citation needed] with a second printing in December, and a third in January 1968.[citation needed] Bantam Books, at that time a subsidiary of Grosset & Dunlap, released a paperback edition in November 1968,[citation needed] and had reached its tenth printing by January 1969.[citation needed] Bain was uncredited other than in a dedication, until the 2003 edition, in which he was credited beneath the Baker and Jones byline as "with Donald Bain."[1]

The Penguin Group, the publisher as of the 21st century, describes the book as "adult fiction".[3]

calmwinds
05-01-2018, 02:27 AM
I don’t know how you guys do things at SkyWest, but a CA is not a flight attendant’s supervisor on a layover. A CA doesn’t write performance reports for FAs, hire/fire FAs, or act as a supervisor in any way, except while working on the clock and on the aircraft. Once the duty clock stops and flight duties are over, they are just two employees on a layover. An airline captain is a Pilot in Command, not a chaperone in command.

No one said anything about being a chaperone in command. Big difference between making sure someone under your command does not do something wrong (a chaparone) and actually being the one who does something wrong (a Captain who takes advantage of FA’s).

I am stating the arguments before the jury. The Captain wears four stripes. The FA wears two. I believe SkyWest will have to pay up, particularly before a Washington jury. I suspect this settles out of court.

BeatNavy
05-01-2018, 02:47 AM
No one said anything about being a chaperone in command. Big difference between making sure someone under your command does not do something wrong (a chaparone) and actually being the one who does something wrong (a Captain who takes advantage of FA’s).

I am stating the arguments before the jury. The Captain wears four stripes. The FA wears two. I believe SkyWest will have to pay up, particularly before a Washington jury. I suspect this settles out of court.

No stripes are worn on a layover. They are just 2 adults who work for the same company while on a layover. There is no rank or senior/subordinate relationship at that point.

Excargodog
05-01-2018, 07:01 AM
No stripes are worn on a layover. They are just 2 adults who work for the same company while on a layover. There is no rank or senior/subordinate relationship at that point.

You can repeat that until you are blue in the face, but it won't fly before a King County jury. And, as Bill Murray said in Meatballs; IT JUST DOESN'T MATTER, because long before the case gets to the jury, the guy has become radioactive. No HR director in a major is going to hire him as long as there is ANY OTHER qualified candidate available.


http://nwnewsnetwork.org/post/new-washington-laws-aim-address-sexual-harassment-workplace

BeatNavy
05-01-2018, 07:39 AM
You can repeat that until you are blue in the face, but it won't fly before a King County jury. And, as Bill Murray said in Meatballs; IT JUST DOESN'T MATTER, because long before the case gets to the jury, the guy has become radioactive. No HR director in a major is going to hire him as long as there is ANY OTHER qualified candidate available.


New Washington Laws Aim To Address Sexual Harassment In The Workplace | NW News Network (http://nwnewsnetwork.org/post/new-washington-laws-aim-address-sexual-harassment-workplace)
Never argued otherwise. I simply pointed out the fallacy that a Captain has authority over a flight attendant on a layover and a consensual relationship would be fraternization and frowned upon. Just isn’t true.

Flightcap
05-01-2018, 07:41 AM
In the words of the great Churchill:

Young men. Never, never, never sleep around.

Or something like that.

rickair7777
05-01-2018, 07:41 AM
The book may well have been fiction, but the way it described the era was accurate according to my older relatives. It was a very exploratory phase in US (and western) culture, and the pendulum swung pretty far... and flight crew were certainly at least keeping up with the pendulum.

Actually it was HIV more than anything else that brought an end to the sexual revolution, and I barely missed it. I was looking forward to college but when I got there we had mandatory freshman AIDs indoc... seems silly today, odds of getting HIV from an 18 year old hetero coed are essentially nil, but we didn't know that at the time and the whole thing was blown way out of proportion.



That seems to be disputable, at least according to Wikipedia:

Donald Bain revealed in his 2002 memoir Every Midget Has an Uncle Sam Costume: Writing for a Living that he wrote Coffee, Tea or Me? and three sequels while employed as a New York City-based American Airlines public relations person.[1] The publisher hired two Eastern Airlines stewardesses to pose as the authors for book tours and television appearances.[1] As The New York Times columnist Joe Sharkey described in 2010,



Bain himself said, "I wrote it in 1966 while working in public relations for American Airlines, and it went on to spawn an entire genre of wacky comedies, including three direct sequels. All in all, the four books sold more than five million copies worldwide, and became my annuity for almost 17 years.[2]

The Bartholomew House Ltd., a division of Bartell Media Corporation, published a hardcover edition in October 1967,[citation needed] with a second printing in December, and a third in January 1968.[citation needed] Bantam Books, at that time a subsidiary of Grosset & Dunlap, released a paperback edition in November 1968,[citation needed] and had reached its tenth printing by January 1969.[citation needed] Bain was uncredited other than in a dedication, until the 2003 edition, in which he was credited beneath the Baker and Jones byline as "with Donald Bain."[1]

The Penguin Group, the publisher as of the 21st century, describes the book as "adult fiction".[3]

rickair7777
05-01-2018, 07:44 AM
No stripes are worn on a layover. They are just 2 adults who work for the same company while on a layover. There is no rank or senior/subordinate relationship at that point.

There's how crews see it, but not how a jury will see it. In the 9-5 world the boss is still the boss on a road trip.

amcnd
05-01-2018, 08:02 AM
So whats OO’s responsibility’s??? We have many “Crew conflicts”. Pbs has a bid avoid, but thats it.. how do you control if people bump into each other in the airport ect...??? Seems unmanageable.. i know of a case where someone had a restraining order. (Both of them are at different airlines now). but how does the company inforce that, nonrev travel, work, ect...

rickair7777
05-01-2018, 08:20 AM
So whats OO’s responsibility’s??? We have many “Crew conflicts”. Pbs has a bid avoid, but thats it.. how do you control if people bump into each other in the airport ect...??? Seems unmanageable.. i know of a case where someone had a restraining order. (Both of them are at different airlines now). but how does the company inforce that, nonrev travel, work, ect...

There have been crew who had restrictions placed on them by SGU (typically in lieu of termination). Ask the SLC guys about "Poison Ivy"...

But if there's a restraining order, that's not the company's problem... that's the restrainee's problem, and he would need to manage his schedule accordingly, might even have to call off a trip last minute if the restrainer is going to be on it.

BeatNavy
05-01-2018, 08:33 AM
There's how crews see it, but not how a jury will see it. In the 9-5 world the boss is still the boss on a road trip.

Any lawyer, good or bad, would be able to get the company and FA to freely admit that there is no rank or senior/subordinate relationship while on an overnight. FOMs are pretty clear about duties and responsibilities of each crewmember. In the court of public opinion? Maybe. A jury or judge after a lawyer would present that case? No way.

Excargodog
05-01-2018, 08:38 AM
Any lawyer, good or bad, would be able to get the company and FA to freely admit that there is no rank or senior/subordinate relationship while on an overnight. FOMs are pretty clear about duties and responsibilities of each crewmember. In the court of public opinion? Maybe. A jury or judge after a lawyer would present that case? No way.

Denial ain't just a river in Egypt...


The Supreme Court, in Faragher and Ellerth, reasoned that vicarious liability for supervisor harassment is appropriate because supervisors are aided in such misconduct by the authority that the employers delegated to them.20 Therefore, that authority must be of a sufficient magnitude so as to assist the harasser explicitly or implicitly in carrying out the harassment. The determination as to whether a harasser had such authority is based on his or her job function rather than job title (e.g., “team leader”) and must be based on the specific facts.

An individual qualifies as an employee’s “supervisor” if:

the individual has authority to undertake or recommend tangible employment decisions affecting the employee; or
the individual has authority to direct the employee’s daily work activities.
1. Authority to Undertake or Recommend Tangible Employment Actions

An individual qualifies as an employee’s “supervisor” if he or she is authorized to undertake tangible employment decisions affecting the employee. “Tangible employment decisions” are decisions that significantly change another employee’s employment status. (For a detailed explanation of what constitutes a tangible employment action, see subsection IV(B), below.) Such actions include, but are not limited to, hiring, firing, promoting, demoting, and reassigning the employee. As the Supreme Court stated,“[t]angible employment actions fall within the special province of the supervisor.”21

An individual whose job responsibilities include the authority to recommend tangible job decisions affecting an employee qualifies as his or her supervisor even if the individual does not have the final say. As the Supreme Court recognized in Ellerth, a tangible employment decision “may be subject to review by higher level supervisors.”22 As long as the individual’s recommendation is given substantial weight by the final decision maker(s), that individual meets the definition of supervisor.

2. Authority to Direct Employee’s Daily Work Activities

An individual who is authorized to direct another employee’s day-to-day work activities qualifies as his or her supervisor even if that individual does not have the authority to undertake or recommend tangible job decisions. Such an individual’s ability to commit harassment is enhanced by his or her authority to increase the employee’s workload or assign undesirable tasks, and hence it is appropriate to consider such a person a “supervisor” when determining whether the employer is vicariously liable.

In Faragher, one of the harassers was authorized to hire, supervise, counsel, and discipline lifeguards, while the other harasser was responsible for making the lifeguards’ daily work assignments and supervising their work and fitness training.23 There was no question that the Court viewed them both as “supervisors,” even though one of them apparently lacked authority regarding tangible job decisions.24

An individual who is temporarily authorized to direct another employee’s daily work activities qualifies as his or her “supervisor” during that time period. Accordingly, the employer would be subject to vicarious liability if that individual commits unlawful harassment of a subordinate while serving as his or her supervisor.

On the other hand, someone who merely relays other officials’ instructions regarding work assignments and reports back to those officials does not have true supervisory authority. Furthermore, someone who directs only a limited number of tasks or assignments would not qualify as a “supervisor.” For example, an individual whose delegated authority is confined to coordinating a work project of limited scope is not a “supervisor.”

B. Harasser Outside Supervisory Chain of Command

In some circumstances, an employer may be subject to vicarious liability for harassment by a supervisor who does not have actual authority over the employee. Such a result is appropriate if the employee reasonably believed that the harasser had such power.25 The employee might have such a belief because, for example, the chains of command are unclear. Alternatively, the employee might reasonably believe that a harasser with broad delegated powers has the ability to significantly influence employment decisions affecting him or her even if the harasser is outside the employee’s chain of command.

If the harasser had no actual supervisory power over the employee, and the employee did not reasonably believe that the harasser had such authority, then the standard of liability for co-worker harassment applies.

https://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/harassment.html

BeatNavy
05-01-2018, 10:36 AM
Denial ain't just a river in Egypt..

You're right. It's not. Now, let me break what you copied and pasted down. Because it shows you are incorrect. Then, I'm disengaging. Can't fix _____, and it isn't worth arguing. In bold are the applicable parts. In red is my commentary.

The Supreme Court...snip... The determination as to whether a harasser had such authority is based on his or her job function rather than job title (e.g., “team leader”) and must be based on the specific facts.

An individual qualifies as an employee’s “supervisor” if:

the individual has authority to undertake or recommend tangible employment decisions affecting the employee; or
the individual has authority to direct the employee’s daily work activities.
1. Authority to Undertake or Recommend Tangible Employment Actions

An individual qualifies as an employee’s “supervisor” if he or she is authorized to undertake tangible employment decisions affecting the employee. “Tangible employment decisions” are decisions that significantly change another employee’s employment status. (For a detailed explanation of what constitutes a tangible employment action, see subsection IV(B), below.) Such actions include, but are not limited to, hiring, firing, promoting, demoting, and reassigning the employee. As the Supreme Court stated,“[t]angible employment actions fall within the special province of the supervisor.”21
As I said before, CAs do not fit this category with respect to FAs. CAs don't hire/fire/promote/demote/reassign anyone.

An individual whose job responsibilities include the authority to recommend tangible job decisions affecting an employee qualifies as his or her supervisor even if the individual does not have the final say. As the Supreme Court recognized in Ellerth, a tangible employment decision “may be subject to review by higher level supervisors.”22 As long as the individual’s recommendation is given substantial weight by the final decision maker(s), that individual meets the definition of supervisor.

2. Authority to Direct Employee’s Daily Work Activities

An individual who is authorized to direct another employee’s day-to-day work activities qualifies as his or her supervisor even if that individual does not have the authority to undertake or recommend tangible job decisions. Such an individual’s ability to commit harassment is enhanced by his or her authority to increase the employee’s workload or assign undesirable tasks, and hence it is appropriate to consider such a person a “supervisor” when determining whether the employer is vicariously liable.

In Faragher, one of the harassers was authorized to hire, supervise, counsel, and discipline lifeguards, while the other harasser was responsible for making the lifeguards’ daily work assignments and supervising their work and fitness training.23 There was no question that the Court viewed them both as “supervisors,” even though one of them apparently lacked authority regarding tangible job decisions.24

An individual who is temporarily authorized to direct another employee’s daily work activities qualifies as his or her “supervisor” during that time period. See, only applies during work. Accordingly, the employer would be subject to vicarious liability if that individual commits unlawful harassment of a subordinate while serving as his or her supervisor.

On the other hand, someone who merely relays other officials’ instructions regarding work assignments and reports back to those officials does not have true supervisory authority. Furthermore, someone who directs only a limited number of tasks or assignments would not qualify as a “supervisor.” Assigning tasks to FAs is limited to preflight/flight duties. Again, doesn't fit this definition.For example, an individual whose delegated authority is confined to coordinating a work project of limited scope is not a “supervisor.”

B. Harasser Outside Supervisory Chain of Command

In some circumstances, an employer may be subject to vicarious liability for harassment by a supervisor who does not have actual authority over the employee. Such a result is appropriate if the employee reasonably believed that the harasser had such power.25 The employee might have such a belief because, for example, the chains of command are unclear. Alternatively, the employee might reasonably believe that a harasser with broad delegated powers has the ability to significantly influence employment decisions affecting him or her even if the harasser is outside the employee’s chain of command.I don't know of any FA I've ever met who thinks a CA could get an FA fired, except for standard reporting of any safety, illegal, or other egregious act that any employee would report. More importantly, I don't know of any FA who would think that a CA has the power to fire an FA, with the exception of a management flight ops pilot.

If the harasser had no actual supervisory power over the employee, and the employee did not reasonably believe that the harasser had such authority, then the standard of liability for co-worker harassment applies.None of the supervisor definitions fit...as I said before...it is 2 employees on an overnight. No fraternization or inappropriate relationship occurred.

It cannot be more clear by what you yourself have pasted here that there is no CA authority or supervisor status on an overnight. If you can't see that, well, I feel bad for you and your lack of reading/comprehension skills.

Also, if it were inappropriate for a CA to nail an FA, it would explicitly state as much in an employee handbook, code of ethics, FOM, etc., since it happens so often. Clearly it doesn't at any airline that I'm aware of.

Green Needles
05-01-2018, 11:04 AM
You're right. It's not. Now, let me break what you copied and pasted down. Because it shows you are incorrect. Then, I'm disengaging. Can't fix _____, and it isn't worth arguing. In bold are the applicable parts. In red is my commentary.



It cannot be more clear by what you yourself have pasted here that there is no CA authority or supervisor status on an overnight. If you can't see that, well, I feel bad for you and your lack of reading/comprehension skills.

Also, if it were inappropriate for a CA to nail an FA, it would explicitly state as much in an employee handbook, code of ethics, FOM, etc., since it happens so often. Clearly it doesn't at any airline that I'm aware of.

There is captain authority the following morning or whenever they are back at work again. He holds supervisory authority over her whether you believe it or not
Both of them were idiots. The CA should have never been alone with and had relations with her and she is irresponsible getting blackout drunk. There are many more details that we will never know on this forum.

All I can say is avoid situations like this. Don't get drunk on layovers, don't fraternize, don't be alone with a co-worker of the opposite sex in a hotel room. Protect yourself, don't throw away your career, marriage, family, or anything else away for one night of "fun"

Excargodog
05-01-2018, 11:11 AM
You're right. It's not. Now, let me break what you copied and pasted down. Because it shows you are incorrect. Then, I'm disengaging. Can't fix _____, and it isn't worth arguing. In bold are the applicable parts. In red is my commentary.



It cannot be more clear by what you yourself have pasted here that there is no CA authority or supervisor status on an overnight. If you can't see that, well, I feel bad for you and your lack of reading/comprehension skills.

Also, if it were inappropriate for a CA to nail an FA, it would explicitly state as much in an employee handbook, code of ethics, FOM, etc., since it happens so often. Clearly it doesn't at any airline that I'm aware of.

So you are saying that at no point in a flight does the captain have any authority over the FA whatever? That he has no input whatever into what she does and how she does it? That's going to be a tough sell.

And you believe that as long as it doesn't "explicitly state " in company documentation that it is "inappropriate for a Ca to nail an FA," that it is your constitutional right to do so? Or that the company won't get vicarious liability if the woman alleges assault on a trip that they scheduled both of you to be on as a condition of employment in a hotel room that they are paying for?

You aren't in denial. You are delusional.

BeatNavy
05-01-2018, 11:39 AM
So you are saying that at no point in a flight does the captain have any authority over the FA whatever? in the flight...yes. I’ve said that repeatedly. He didn’t have relations with her in the flight. It was off duty, where he has no supervisory authority over an FA. That he has no input whatever into what she does and how she does it? Reread what that case you cited stated...he temporarily has supervisory authority over her, and it exists only in flight while he is the pilot in command. That's going to be a tough sell. no it’s not, if you have any sort of reading comprehension ability.

And you believe that as long as it doesn't "explicitly state " in company documentation that it is "inappropriate for a Ca to nail an FA," that it is your constitutional right to do so? constitutional right? It’s not in the constitution. But legally, or according to company policy, pilots are not prohibited from having any sexual (or other) relations with flight attendants. Or that the company won't get vicarious liability if the woman alleges assault on a trip that they scheduled both of you to be on as a condition of employment in a hotel room that they are paying for? They could be found to have liability, or they could settle and no one will ever know how it would play out. I don’t know the details of the case. You’ll notice the only thing I’ve argued since (unfortunately) stumbling into the SkyWest thread was that pilots are fully allowed to hook up with flight attendants, and have no supervisory authority over FAs on overnights.

You aren't in denial. You are delusional.

Yeah...right.

Flymeaway
05-01-2018, 06:48 PM
I could maybe believe that a jury could be convinced that a CA wasn’t a supervisor after the trip had ended...maybe. Though there is still a good possibility that that FA would be assigned a trip with the same CA in the future.

During the trip though, you’ll never sell that. A supervisor is still the supervisor after hours. If your boss calls you at home, he’s still the boss, not your buddy who you can feel free to tell to F off.

In reality, I agree that CAs exercise very little influence over what FAs do or don’t do at work, but I doubt that would matter to a jury, as the buck does stop with the CA. Also, while a CA may not make hiring or firing decisions, a call from a CA to the lead FA with a complaint could be very serious for the FA as their employment is a lot more tenuous than a pilot’s. Certainly an FA could be reasonably concerned about that possibility. That’s all that’s required under that statute.

I agree with the posters above though...whether he’s guilty or innocent, he’s completely screwed either way. A cautionary tale, certainly.

Mercyful Fate
05-02-2018, 02:50 AM
I could maybe believe that a jury could be convinced that a CA wasn’t a supervisor after the trip had ended...maybe. Though there is still a good possibility that that FA would be assigned a trip with the same CA in the future.

During the trip though, you’ll never sell that. A supervisor is still the supervisor after hours. If your boss calls you at home, he’s still the boss, not your buddy who you can feel free to tell to F off.

In reality, I agree that CAs exercise very little influence over what FAs do or don’t do at work, but I doubt that would matter to a jury, as the buck does stop with the CA. Also, while a CA may not make hiring or firing decisions, a call from a CA to the lead FA with a complaint could be very serious for the FA as their employment is a lot more tenuous than a pilot’s. Certainly an FA could be reasonably concerned about that possibility. That’s all that’s required under that statute.

I agree with the posters above though...whether he’s guilty or innocent, he’s completely screwed either way. A cautionary tale, certainly.

A supervisor is your supervisor when you are on the clock, not after. Trying selling that argument to the department of labor, and you will get laughed at.

calmwinds
05-02-2018, 04:29 AM
No stripes are worn on a layover. They are just 2 adults who work for the same company while on a layover. There is no rank or senior/subordinate relationship at that point.

If a CA has “influence” on the employment of the FA, he is toast when it goes before a jury. A jury won’t even understand your point. There doesn’t need to be a boss/subordinate relationship to exist.

This will never get to a jury because SkyWest will settle. This article was planned to let SkyWest know the plaintiff and her attorney are serious.

Excargodog
05-02-2018, 06:47 AM
A supervisor is your supervisor when you are on the clock, not after. Trying selling that argument to the department of labor, and you will get laughed at.

Let's see.

Were the CA and FA receiving per diem or not from the company on the entirety of the trip?

We're the CA and FA or were they not making use of hotel accommodations that the company wrote off as a business expense on the company tax statement?

Were they or were they not on a trip rig at the time this happened?

By DOL standards, they are "on the clock" until released from duty at their own domicile.

It's not even a hard call.

amcnd
05-02-2018, 06:55 AM
I see FA and Pilot trips being split like Some majors... but in all reality no should the company protect me from the flu, cold ect. “Im on duty” interacting with people...

rickair7777
05-02-2018, 07:27 AM
If a CA has “influence” on the employment of the FA, he is toast when it goes before a jury. A jury won’t even understand your point. There doesn’t need to be a boss/subordinate relationship to exist.

This will never get to a jury because SkyWest will settle. This article was planned to let SkyWest know the plaintiff and her attorney are serious.

Yup. It would be a steep uphill battle for SKW to convince a jury (esp. in king county :rolleyes: ) that a "Captain" has no implied authority or leverage over a subordinate crew-member. Corporations are routinely held financially accountable for the actions of employees on business trips. SOMEBODY has to pay, and it's going to be the nearest deep pockets, the only thing they are really fighting over now is the exact amount.

Well it's possible SGU may be assuming "Utah Rules" for labor issues, if so they're going to be in for a very rude awakening shortly...

Mercyful Fate
05-02-2018, 02:56 PM
Let's see.

Were the CA and FA receiving per diem or not from the company on the entirety of the trip?

We're the CA and FA or were they not making use of hotel accommodations that the company wrote off as a business expense on the company tax statement?

Were they or were they not on a trip rig at the time this happened?

By DOL standards, they are "on the clock" until released from duty at their own domicile.

It's not even a hard call.

Not a hard call?

OK, please explain this to me. Why is it then, crew members are allowed to consume alcohol while being "on the clock"? Why are crew members allowed to engage in sexual activity while "on the clock" ? I mean, if you are going to use the argument about per diem and hotels, those two activities happening should result in immediate termination since those are clearly against most companies policies while on the clock.

You should have thought your argument through a weeeee bit better.

Excargodog
05-02-2018, 08:12 PM
Not a hard call?

OK, please explain this to me. Why is it then, crew members are allowed to consume alcohol while being "on the clock"? Why are crew members allowed to engage in sexual activity while "on the clock" ? I mean, if you are going to use the argument about per diem and hotels, those two activities happening should result in immediate termination since those are clearly against most companies policies while on the clock.

You should have thought your argument through a weeeee bit better.

Are you being purposefully obtuse? Or is that the best you got? I conceived two kids while in the military, and we were on the clock 24/7. For that matter, the O-club had not one but two bars, a casual one where everyone actually went and a more formal one that I don't believe most of us ever went to. Yet we were subject to UCMJ - and immediate telephone recall - every minute.

The issue WHICH YOU BROUGHT UP wasn't WHAT THEY WERE DOING, WHICH as long as it was legal and both were willing participants was no big deal, but whether they were both "on the clock" by DOL standards.

They were on a trip that had not been completed, and being compensated for being there. They were indeed, "on the clock."

You may wish to pretend that no supervisory/subordinate issues are involved, but in 2018 that argument is not going to fly, anymore than claiming that it is somehow a CA's inalienable right to bang the Junior FA because that sort of behavior has long gone on.

Both those positions will lose - big time - in a court of law. Assuming, of course, it even gets there. Like most, I think Skywest will rather dramatically increase their anti sexual harassment program, just as Alaska has recently done. And then settle this case quietly out of court.

450knotOffice
05-02-2018, 11:20 PM
...
All I can say is avoid situations like this. Don't get drunk on layovers, don't fraternize, don't be alone with a co-worker of the opposite sex in a hotel room. Protect yourself, don't throw away your career, marriage, family, or anything else away for one night of "fun"

This right here is the absolute truth! Wanna stay out of trouble? Follow these basic rules.

Well said.

Mercyful Fate
05-03-2018, 01:46 AM
Are you being purposefully obtuse? Or is that the best you got? I conceived two kids while in the military, and we were on the clock 24/7. For that matter, the O-club had not one but two bars, a casual one where everyone actually went and a more formal one that I don't believe most of us ever went to. Yet we were subject to UCMJ - and immediate telephone recall - every minute.

The issue WHICH YOU BROUGHT UP wasn't WHAT THEY WERE DOING, WHICH as long as it was legal and both were willing participants was no big deal, but whether they were both "on the clock" by DOL standards.

They were on a trip that had not been completed, and being compensated for being there. They were indeed, "on the clock."

You may wish to pretend that no supervisory/subordinate issues are involved, but in 2018 that argument is not going to fly, anymore than claiming that it is somehow a CA's inalienable right to bang the Junior FA because that sort of behavior has long gone on.

Both those positions will lose - big time - in a court of law. Assuming, of course, it even gets there. Like most, I think Skywest will rather dramatically increase their anti sexual harassment program, just as Alaska has recently done. And then settle this case quietly out of court.

Purposely obtuse? Best that I have got?

Ahhh, seems that I have struck a nerve with you...why is that? You are like a dog chasing its tail trying to "make a point" that someone is on the clock 24/7 in regards to labor and legal issues. Military and the private sector are two completely different animals, and the fact you even tried to compare the two shows how you are grasping at anything to hopefully "make your point".

Are you a SkyWest pilot? If so, where in your company manual does it give you the guidelines for what is allowed "while on the clock and not in uniform?" There would have to be specific rules in print showing what is considered appropriate behavior, and what can lead to disciplinary action.

rickair7777
05-03-2018, 07:21 AM
Purposely obtuse? Best that I have got?

Ahhh, seems that I have struck a nerve with you...why is that? You are like a dog chasing its tail trying to "make a point" that someone is on the clock 24/7 in regards to labor and legal issues. Military and the private sector are two completely different animals, and the fact you even tried to compare the two shows how you are grasping at anything to hopefully "make your point".

Are you a SkyWest pilot? If so, where in your company manual does it give you the guidelines for what is allowed "while on the clock and not in uniform?" There would have to be specific rules in print showing what is considered appropriate behavior, and what can lead to disciplinary action.

It's not about "labor law" it's about the jury. The company is going to pay for sending a female on an overnight trip with a rapist, that's just a given in any state and any industry. Discovery will help determine how much they pay, based on the CA's previous history (if any). That and how eager the company is to settle and put this to rest as quietly as possible. Actual advantage to being a regional here, despite being one the largest airlines in the US, almost nobody in the public has ever heard of them so they don't have to protect their brand nearly as much a major.

amcnd
05-03-2018, 07:34 AM
It's not about "labor law" it's about the jury. The company is going to pay for sending a female on an overnight trip with a rapist, that's just a given in any state and any industry. Discovery will help determine how much they pay, based on the CA's previous history (if any). That and how eager the company is to settle and put this to rest as quietly as possible. Actual advantage to being a regional here, despite being one the largest airlines in the US, almost nobody in the public has ever heard of them so they don't have to protect their brand nearly as much a major.

Don’t be harsh to judge him yet... if you read the article he was not arested, nor Found guilty of anything yet.. and both may have history.. Not just the CA. we don’t know how this will play out yet.

rickair7777
05-03-2018, 10:02 AM
Don’t be harsh to judge him yet... if you read the article he was not arested, nor Found guilty of anything yet.. and both may have history.. Not just the CA. we don’t know how this will play out yet.

Absolutely not judging at all, I'm describing it from the jury's perspective (King County jury...).

As I said before, for all we know the reality could be anything from Full Cosby to calculated setup for financial gain. But if it's the later, no one will be held accountable, too much victim shaming stigma (unless a fake "victim" were to literally confess on the stand or on tape).

itsmytime
05-03-2018, 11:03 AM
Absolutely not judging at all, I'm describing it from the jury's perspective (King County jury...).

As I said before, for all we know the reality could be anything from Full Cosby to calculated setup for financial gain. But if it's the later, no one will be held accountable, too much victim shaming stigma (unless a fake "victim" were to literally confess on the stand or on tape).

You keep emphasizing the point about King county. Care to elaborate? Genuinely curious, I’ve never been to Seattle, and know nothing of the residents of King county.

rickair7777
05-03-2018, 12:10 PM
You keep emphasizing the point about King county. Care to elaborate? Genuinely curious, I’ve never been to Seattle, and know nothing of the residents of King county.

Left of Bernie, social justice army. I think they have actual communists holding local offices.

trip
05-03-2018, 12:52 PM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statue_of_Lenin,_Seattle

itsmytime
05-03-2018, 02:17 PM
Left of Bernie, social justice army. I think they have actual communists holding local offices.

LOL, at the “left of Bernie.”

Excargodog
05-03-2018, 03:00 PM
You keep emphasizing the point about King county. Care to elaborate? Genuinely curious, I’ve never been to Seattle, and know nothing of the residents of King county.

King County Washington was named back when Washington was still a territory in honor of Rufus King, who was Vice President for six weeks during the Franklin Pierce administration before dying of TB. The adjoining county was named Pierce County, both in an attempt to get statehood for the new territory. The attempted schmooze failed, and the territory wasn't actually admitted as a state until 1889. Seattle and King County were always sort of a haven for socialists and radicals, and the center for the International Workers of the World (aka the Wobblies) although adjoining counties did not necessarily share their views (Google : Everett Wobblie Massacre).

To their complete and utter horror, someone reminded King County denizens that Rufus King, a former Representative from North Carolina and Senator from Alabama (as well as Ambassador to France) had once been a slaveowner. In a fit of panic and disgust, the citizens of King County rescinded the dedication to Rufus King in 2005 and then, being basically cheap bastards who didn't want to change a lot of signs or buy new stationary (while nonetheless being politically correct) changed the name of the County to King County in honor of Martin Luther King Jr., thereby avoiding tremendous expense and angst.

Mercyful Fate
05-03-2018, 04:27 PM
King County Washington was named back when Washington was still a territory in honor of Rufus King, who was Vice President for six weeks during the Franklin Pierce administration before dying of TB. The adjoining county was named Pierce County, both in an attempt to get statehood for the new territory. The attempted schmooze failed, and the territory wasn't actually admitted as a state until 1889. Seattle and King County were always sort of a haven for socialists and radicals, and the center for the International Workers of the World (aka the Wobblies) although adjoining counties did not necessarily share their views (Google : Everett Wobblie Massacre).

To their complete and utter horror, someone reminded King County denizens that Rufus King, a former Representative from North Carolina and Senator from Alabama (as well as Ambassador to France) had once been a slaveowner. In a fit of panic and disgust, the citizens of King County rescinded the dedication to Rufus King in 2005 and then, being basically cheap bastards who didn't want to change a lot of signs or buy new stationary (while nonetheless being politically correct) changed the name of the County to King County in honor of Martin Luther King Jr., thereby avoiding tremendous expense and angst.

https://i.imgflip.com/mw5mw.jpg

gojo
05-03-2018, 04:36 PM
https://i.imgflip.com/mw5mw.jpg

Priceless, you dog a poster for copying and pasting with a copy and paste.

Mercyful Fate
05-03-2018, 04:38 PM
Priceless, you dog a poster for copying and pasting with a copy and paste.

Wow, you figured that out. Now, that is priceless

http://replygif.net/i/1472.gif

MadDog80
05-03-2018, 04:48 PM
Purposely obtuse? Best that I have got?

Ahhh, seems that I have struck a nerve with you...why is that? You are like a dog chasing its tail trying to "make a point" that someone is on the clock 24/7 in regards to labor and legal issues. Military and the private sector are two completely different animals, and the fact you even tried to compare the two shows how you are grasping at anything to hopefully "make your point".

Are you a SkyWest pilot? If so, where in your company manual does it give you the guidelines for what is allowed "while on the clock and not in uniform?" There would have to be specific rules in print showing what is considered appropriate behavior, and what can lead to disciplinary action.

Are YOU a Skywest pilot? No. Then get off our forum you troll. Nobody here needs to hear the thoughts of some idiot without a life who isn't even allowed behind the door of an airline cockpit.

Mercyful Fate
05-03-2018, 04:49 PM
Are YOU a Skywest pilot? No. Then get off our forum you troll. Nobody here needs to hear the thoughts of some idiots without a life who isn't even allowed behind the door of an airline cockpit.

No I am not, and if you have been paying attention you would know that. You forget to take your midol?

Excargodog
05-03-2018, 05:55 PM
https://i.imgflip.com/mw5mw.jpg

Think so? Find the URL you believe it was copied and pasted from. Or admit you don't know what you are talking about.

I'll wait.

PS: If I'd copied and pasted there would have been an editor telling me that I wrote 'stationary' when I should have written 'stationery'.

Mercyful Fate
05-03-2018, 06:13 PM
Think so? Find the URL you believe it was copied and pasted from. Or admit you don't know what you are talking about.

I'll wait.

Yup, you go ahead and wait. I am finding you extremely entertaining.

450knotOffice
05-03-2018, 07:05 PM
Lol! Love it.
Merciful has no idea.
You are NOT the smartest guy in the room, Mercyful (even though you think you are).
Take him on. You’ll just look like the clueless troll you are.

(And bring on the personal attack, which I know is coming. It actually amuses me that you are so thin skinned as to always need to have the last word, and lead with an insult, something you claim never to do, yet manage to do about 75% of the time. It matters not to me. However, I’m going to sit here and watch you throw a thinly veiled passive aggressive tantrum (cue the cut and paste overused Meme) because you’ve encountered someone smarter than you. Lol!)

Paid2fly
05-03-2018, 11:49 PM
No I am not, and if you have been paying attention you would know that. You forget to take your midol?







Maybe you can give him a couple from your personal stash?;):D

Mercyful Fate
05-04-2018, 01:57 AM
Lol! Love it.
Merciful has no idea.
You are NOT the smartest guy in the room, Mercyful (even though you think you are).
Take him on. You’ll just look like the clueless troll you are.

(And bring on the personal attack, which I know is coming. It actually amuses me that you are so thin skinned as to always need to have the last word, and lead with an insult, something you claim never to do, yet manage to do about 75% of the time. It matters not to me. However, I’m going to sit here and watch you throw a thinly veiled passive aggressive tantrum (cue the cut and paste overused Meme) because you’ve encountered someone smarter than you. Lol!)


Wow, you are calling out my smarts and yet use two different spellings of my user name in a matter of seconds.

Oh my posts matter to you, as you spent all this time putting together this amazingly comical post. I hope you never stop.

http://replygif.net/i/1311.gif

gojo
05-04-2018, 05:41 AM
Wow, you are calling out my smarts and yet use two different spellings of my user name in a matter of seconds.

Oh my posts matter to you, as you spent all this time putting together this amazingly comical post. I hope you never stop.

http://replygif.net/i/1311.gif

At least he didn’t call you General Lee. It’s been a while since you used that one.