Originally Posted by gzsg (Post 1697196)

They wouldnt laugh if we refused to grant relief on the upcoming.displacements.

Sadly we will lay down and surrender faster than the French.

Originally Posted by Starcheck102 (Post 1697198)

That is simply false. ALPA never endorsed Obama, does not endorse presidential candidates (thank GOD), and he received no money from ALPA PAC.

I could give a rat about the AFL-CIO - they don't pay dues. You pay dues, so I hope you will check the facts on this for yourself.

This is just one of several occasions when Barry has tossed American pilots under the bus. The highlights include whatever devil's bargain he made with the crown prince of Abu Dhabi, and what he directed to happen at OMB during the endgame of FAR 117.

And now this. I must say his actions make it impossible to support him as an airline pilot. I have no confidence that he is actually on the side of organized labor.

You should retract your assertion. It is as false as it is offensive to the dozen-odd Delta pilots who work very hard on the Hill. The Pilot Partisan agenda is more than just a slogan to us, it represents the only way ALPA can stay relevant and avoid getting cornered in a very toxic political environment.

Originally Posted by FrankCobretti (Post 1696588)

Casual Observer pretty much makes the argument, but I'll make my own version:

As you know, LBFM stands for "Little Brown ****ing Machine."

"Hooker" isn't racist. "Lady of the night" isn't racist. "Little Brown ****ing Machine" is racist because it (a) specifies two racial characteristics [stature and skin color] and (b) pairs them with a dehumanizing term [****ing machine].

Ask yourself, would you have been equally comfortable with someone writing that captains just wanted to get to Atlanta so they could see little black Sambo?

I'm sure those who use the term mean nothing by it. They probably picked it up before they became critical thinkers, and they've probably never been challenged on it before. But they wouldn't be pilots if they weren't smart. Upon further reflection, they'll come around.

Originally Posted by GunshipGuy (Post 1697205)

So that I don't offend someone or their race in the future, I ask for clarity: If I use the term "White Trash" am I using a racial term? Thanks ahead of time.

Originally Posted by FrankCobretti (Post 1697164)

I feel sheepish this morning. I made my point. Then, I let someone get under my skin, got angry (internet angry is both the worst and silliest kind of angry), and loosed a rhetorical flourish that destroyed my credibility.

That's some rookie forensics, right there.

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler (Post 1697125)

Since I can't paste the exact words here, I'll paraphrase from page 2 of the Q & A, emphasis mine: '...notwithstanding reductions in trans-Atlantic growth plans, the combined JV trans-Atlantic network will grow this winter by 3 percent, though not as much originally planned.'

If it was Delta Air Lines that would be growing by 3% in the Atlantic, they would have said Delta Air Lines. Instead, they said "the JV Trans-Atlantic network." Further, they said the reductions in the Atlantic at Delta will free up those Delta aircraft to fly Pacific routes abandoned by the 744.

They couldn't have been more clear. Delta will be flying less Delta aircraft in the Atlantic. The JV network will grow by 3% in the Atlantic. This will widen our imbalance in the JV and it will occur during the "cure period" of our scope section.

Carl

Originally Posted by shiznit (Post 1697156)

We don't know how much EASKs the AF/KL side is going to be reducing, so don't assume the other side of the Atlantic is static.

Originally Posted by shiznit (Post 1697156)

There is leverage there, but like T says, how do you remedy the violation without "selling scope for pay"???

Originally Posted by FrankCobretti (Post 1697164)

I feel sheepish this morning. I made my point. Then, I let someone get under my skin, got angry (internet angry is both the worst and silliest kind of angry), and loosed a rhetorical flourish that destroyed my credibility.

That's some rookie forensics, right there.

Originally Posted by Starcheck102 (Post 1697198)

That is simply false. ALPA never endorsed Obama, does not endorse presidential candidates (thank GOD), and he received no money from ALPA PAC.

Originally Posted by Starcheck102 (Post 1697198)

I could give a rat about the AFL-CIO - they don't pay dues. You pay dues, so I hope you will check the facts on this for yourself.

Originally Posted by Starcheck102 (Post 1697198)

This is just one of several occasions when Barry has tossed American pilots under the bus. The highlights include whatever devil's bargain he made with the crown prince of Abu Dhabi, and what he directed to happen at OMB during the endgame of FAR 117.

And now this. I must say his actions make it impossible to support him as an airline pilot. I have no confidence that he is actually on the side of organized labor.

Originally Posted by Starcheck102 (Post 1697198)

You should retract your assertion. It is as false as it is offensive to the dozen-odd Delta pilots who work very hard on the Hill. The Pilot Partisan agenda is more than just a slogan to us, it represents the only way ALPA can stay relevant and avoid getting cornered in a very toxic political environment.