|
|
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1643640)
They made the big boy decision to take the risk. Should the union make them whole? That is an excellent question. I'll only say maybe to that one and it truly depends on the circumstances, but I don't think it right that we all assessed to cover someone that took a risk, knowing that it could blow up in their face.
....And nowhere did I say that the guys that take that risk did anything wrong.... Ummm.......OK... |
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 1643843)
That would be legal as long as the pattern did not change. If however the union put out a letter telling pilots to do that and the pattern of when pilots acknowledged trips changed from the norm I can assure you the company would have injunction in no time.
|
Originally Posted by newKnow
(Post 1643877)
PD,
I'm going to repost what I posted a few weeks ago and see if you now agree with me. |
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1643640)
The truth lies somewhere in the middle. If a pilot chooses to be Rosa Parks or Lech Walesa, there is a certain amount of risk involved with that decision. IMHO, they will be made whole at some point in time, but they made the big boy decision to take the risk. Should the union make them whole? That is an excellent question. I'll only say maybe to that one and it truly depends on the circumstances, but I don't think it right that we all assessed to cover someone that took a risk, knowing that it could blow up in their face without then being reimbursed by that party when/if they win the grievance.
Fire away. |
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1643640)
The truth lies somewhere in the middle. If a pilot chooses to be Rosa Parks or Lech Walesa, there is a certain amount of risk involved with that decision.
Thank goodness there are folks of vision and guts on our seniority list...and society...and throughout history...who are willing to take a risk to make things better for the rest of us. You just reap the benefits of their risks...while at the same time, ridiculing their willingness to take those risks. You are a small man. |
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1643765)
Because CDOs are a cat we don't need to let out of the bag. Sure a few of them go senior, but most will go junior and to reserves. Just like they do at US.
I haven't heard a peep about CDOs though so I kind of doubt it's part of the package. |
Originally Posted by Purple Drank
(Post 1643886)
My response is the same as I posted a few weeks back (don't have time to find it now).
That includes next day flying too, right? |
Originally Posted by Purple Drank
(Post 1643888)
Look who's back. Captain Risk Averse (LCA).
Thank goodness there are folks of vision and guts on our seniority list...and society...and throughout history...who are willing to take a risk to make things better for the rest of us. You just reap the benefits of their risks...while at the same time, ridiculing their willingness to take those risks. You are a small man. Oh... and I trade AAPL options. risk averse? |
Originally Posted by Purple Drank
(Post 1643884)
Why doesn't DALPA file for an injunction?
What is DALPA going to say Delta is doing to it/us? It's true, our pilots are losing money. Hell, soon I might be one of them, because from what I see, the company's position, in many instances, is unworkable. But, the harm to us is going to be recouped later on, one way, or another. What's going on with us doesn't warrant an injunction. We would lose. |
Originally Posted by iceman49
(Post 1643887)
T, I believe that any agreement that is negotiated with the company will contain a provision to pay for PDs, I also believe that we should stand together and pay the PDs from the union if the above will not happen.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:30 PM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands