Originally Posted by newKnow (Post 1686492)

You used to be able to park in the same place all the time so as to avoid that problem. Now, the parking lot is always so full you have to park where you can find a space.

What's up with that and how long will it last?

Originally Posted by Boomer (Post 1686615)

New, if you want lots of open parking spots, have you considered bidding for CVG?

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler (Post 1686523)

Many (including me) will work to ensure that as few of you as possible ever return to union work.

Carl

Originally Posted by buzzpat (Post 1686609)

Yes, a) she didn't know who she was interviewing, b) any reputable network knows to vet interviews, especially "call ins," and, c), she was clueless as to time, place, circumstance, etc.

So, yes. She's an idiot.

Also new, I can't wait to have a beer with you and talk about our current executive. What a frikkin mess,

Originally Posted by Bucking Bar (Post 1686479)

That's how I see it.

Maybe next week I can ping some of the London market and see how the risk management community is sizing this up.

Originally Posted by alfaromeo (Post 1686508)

Here is the crux of the problem, YOU don't believe in democracy. If there is a vote that you disagree with, it is a flawed democracy, it can't be just that you were in the minority.

The MEC adopted the policy manual unanimously and that policy manual guided everyone's actions in the C2012 negotiations. At least fifty times you and others have been asked to quote the section of the policy manual that wasn't followed. You won't and you can't, because it was followed to the letter. The policy manual is not the way you want so therefore it is flawed because YOU don't believe in democracy.

The MEC had seven days to mull over the TA. You claim they were arm twisted and cajoled, but not you, you didn't fall for it. Wow, how special that makes you. In fact, there were many events planned for people to sit around and discuss the agreement openly and have a frank discussion. Instead of attending these, you and many others locked themselves away in your own little club. Maybe you expected them to read your mind about how you felt. When the vote comes out 2 to 1 against you, well it is a flawed vote and those who voted yes were either too stupid or too weak to stand up for themselves. In reality it is YOU that doesn't believe in democracy.

The pilots were given the full contract language and had at least a month to go through it. They could ask questions debate the issues, attend road shows, and make their decision. Again they voted 2 to 1 against you. Again it was because they were too stupid or too weak to stand up for themselves. YOU don't believe in democracy.

What you really want is to have some type of super delegate status where we don't really have a vote, we only get to count the votes that you agree with. You have never accepted our policy manual, the MEC rarely meets where you or one of your friends has not tried to change the policy manual and you still lose those votes. Once again the MEC is too stupid or too weak to do the right thing because YOU don't believe in democracy. Seriously, how many times do we have to have the same debate about electing committee chairman? I know that is the way you are used to, but do you have any data to show that your way produces better results? But hey, if you don't believe in democracy then the democratic vote doesn't mean anything. We should just keep voting until we get it right.

If you are going to claim the policy manual wasn't followed then at least you should quote the section that wasn't followed. I await with bated breath.

So I turn you statement right back on you. You didn't get the result you desire and therefore the democracy is flawed. By a two to one margin the Delta pilot group disagrees with you, but of course they are too stupid or too weak to make their own decisions.

Originally Posted by alfaromeo (Post 1686508)

Here is the crux of the problem, YOU don't believe in democracy. If there is a vote that you disagree with, it is a flawed democracy, it can't be just that you were in the minority.

The MEC adopted the policy manual unanimously and that policy manual guided everyone's actions in the C2012 negotiations. At least fifty times you and others have been asked to quote the section of the policy manual that wasn't followed. You won't and you can't, because it was followed to the letter. The policy manual is not the way you want so therefore it is flawed because YOU don't believe in democracy.

The MEC had seven days to mull over the TA. You claim they were arm twisted and cajoled, but not you, you didn't fall for it. Wow, how special that makes you. In fact, there were many events planned for people to sit around and discuss the agreement openly and have a frank discussion. Instead of attending these, you and many others locked themselves away in your own little club. Maybe you expected them to read your mind about how you felt. When the vote comes out 2 to 1 against you, well it is a flawed vote and those who voted yes were either too stupid or too weak to stand up for themselves. In reality it is YOU that doesn't believe in democracy.

The pilots were given the full contract language and had at least a month to go through it. They could ask questions debate the issues, attend road shows, and make their decision. Again they voted 2 to 1 against you. Again it was because they were too stupid or too weak to stand up for themselves. YOU don't believe in democracy.

What you really want is to have some type of super delegate status where we don't really have a vote, we only get to count the votes that you agree with. You have never accepted our policy manual, the MEC rarely meets where you or one of your friends has not tried to change the policy manual and you still lose those votes. Once again the MEC is too stupid or too weak to do the right thing because YOU don't believe in democracy. Seriously, how many times do we have to have the same debate about electing committee chairman? I know that is the way you are used to, but do you have any data to show that your way produces better results? But hey, if you don't believe in democracy then the democratic vote doesn't mean anything. We should just keep voting until we get it right.

If you are going to claim the policy manual wasn't followed then at least you should quote the section that wasn't followed. I await with bated breath.

So I turn you statement right back on you. You didn't get the result you desire and therefore the democracy is flawed. By a two to one margin the Delta pilot group disagrees with you, but of course they are too stupid or too weak to make their own decisions.

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler (Post 1686523)

Many (including me) will work to ensure that as few of you as possible ever return to union work.

Carl

Originally Posted by Mesabah (Post 1686552)

Once a contract reaches memrat, it's a bit too late, and the pilot has to vote on what's in front of them. Just because they vote yes, doesn't mean the contract isn't a failure of negotiations. The mindset of the yes vote, is perhaps because the pilot believes he can not receive a better deal by voting no, given the perceived weakness of the NC.

Originally Posted by alfaromeo (Post 1686679)

And so here we get the essence of the forum/webboard mentality: the pilots are just not capable of making their own decisions so the forum guys have to make it for them. Thank god we have you here to decide for us.