I find it interesting that his rationale (if I understand it) is that pilots who don't support the rule can expect everyone over 60 to scab if the rule is changed.

Talk about twisted logic.

 

Can and SHOULD expect them to scab ... after all, it's only logical in NMB's (Bob's) mind.

 

Well the Wall Street Journal has it that as early as tomorrow the FAA may propose raising the age to 65. Let the games begin!

 

I have no interest or incentive to directly respond to criticism on this board. I think the emotionalism and lack of creative content speaks for itself.

As far as I am concerned, visitors to this site may read what the anonymous name-callers write, and they may read what I write. They can consider the track records of the name-callers, and they can consider mine. Readers are, I am sure, well aware that a number of contributors here are quite willing to misrepresent the content of conversations and statements in order to support their positions. I will leave it up to the readers to decide.

What I will say again is that ALPA is a complete strategic failure and has been unable to get out in front of virtually any important issue, including Age 60. Everyone knows it. Ours has become a dog-eat-dog, every-man-for-himself profession that is exemplfied by by a good number of comments on this site. In my opinion, ALPA would do well to learn from the past and quit repeating the same old mistakes.

I suggest that a few of you get together on a conference call with John Prater (tell him I suggested it), discuss the historic lessons you have not learned, and ask him how he feels about my article and the "irresolvable dilemmas" that we have created for ourselves.

Press on. I and, perhaps, a few other readers await your report.

Bob

P.S. Name-callers: I am pretty good at "marketing." If you would like a lesson in stirring things up in order to bring attention to your cause and get things done, let me know. In the meantime, thank you for being so easy to "stir up." On a matter such as Age 60, all publicity is good publicity, and you have made the publicist's job much easier.

 

That's pretty funny Bob. YOU telling US every man is out for himself ... said like a true blue out-for-himself NONMEMBER!

Regards ... Mark

 

"I have no interest or incentive to directly respond to criticism on this board."

As I said.. He will not answer any question directly


"As far as I am concerned, visitors to this site may read what the anonymous name-callers write, and they may read what I write. They can consider the track records of the name-callers, and they can consider mine."

A300 FO IM me and I will remind you of my name. Track record??? Non Members have a well established track record.

"Readers are, I am sure, well aware that a number of contributors here are quite willing to misrepresent the content of conversations and statements in order to support their positions."

Not one bit of my conversation with you was misrepresented.....every word was spoken by you and heard by myself and the Capt...

"What I will say again is that ALPA is a complete strategic failure and has been unable to get out in front of virtually any important issue, including Age 60."

Your view... and the age 60 rule is the most important? What about protecting our jobs....pensions...etc?


Bob, you are on the outside looking in....

My views on age 60 are my views, but I am willing to listen to any member who wants to educate me.... But I am never willing to listen to a NON Member...

Have a great day...

 

I have yet to see anyone adequately address the BS practice of foodstamp wages for newhires at CAL(and no health insurance), UPS and the old AA.


It seems that is all the article is about. It's about the junior dudes supporting the senior dudes. This whole "apprentice" nonsense is ridiculous unless you hire 250 hr wonders.

Thankfully some companies have salaries worth starting for now. Namely SWA and FedEx.

 

I know dat's! right.....what he said.

 

Wrong thread, too early in the morning.

 

I don't know you Lavender. I approach you as an outsider with an open mind but I can't get over your non-member status. That takes tons of credibility away from you speaking on pilot union matters. It doesn't just take away your voice (union vote) it makes all your attempts to communicate sound anti-social and selfish. Your unwillingness to work with and respect your own pilot group speaks volumes.

Your hurt feelings get in the way of your cause. All I see is an individual taking care of number one. I don't believe you have anyone elses interests at heart.

Pretty good at marketing, eh? Then you should know how ridiculous your non-member status makes you look, regardless of your own perceived integrity and ideals.

Talk about real estate and I'm all ears.