![]() |
|
Originally Posted by iceman49
(Post 1722686)
|
Originally Posted by Cohiba
(Post 1722816)
One of the most prescient posts of the year. Microsoft committed to $400 million to supply Surface Pro's to the NFL. As I understand it, DAL bought 90,000 Surface 2's (substandard and no longer made and still not here after an 18 month delay). Something is fishy here. Did we actually purchase these devices? If so, then I'm thinking we got a really bad deal. Maybe DALPA should negotiate a $400M deal and we get (and promote the Surface Pro). DALPA could keep 5% and distribute the $380M between the Delta pilots.
Free beer tomorrow, too. |
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1722819)
The devices are a 3 year lease. They'll be here next month. :D
Free beer tomorrow, too. |
Originally Posted by LeineLodge
(Post 1722632)
So you're running in the next election cycle?
You have such a low (and vocal) opinion of nearly everyone that has stepped up...any chance you'll grace us with your superior ability next time around?
Originally Posted by LeineLodge
(Post 1722632)
Show me a path to achieve what you want and I'll vote for you - seriously. Unfortunately, all I see from you is a feel-good mantra...If we would only STATE restoration as a goal, it would suddenly become more attainable!!! Do you really believe that the reps don't seek to improve our lot in life, at every opportunity? Really?
There's nothing magic about stating an objective. It takes a lot more than just that... developing a plan, implementing the plan, and making sure we have the resolve to achieve the plan. No one (including me) has ever said it would be easy. I think it would have been a little easier if we had come out of bankruptcy and immediately began pursuing restoration, instead of spending the past DECADE acting like we don't ever expect anything of the sort. THAT, my friend, has made the task infinitely more difficult. But there is one thing I can virtually guarantee you. And that is the glaringly obvious observation that one is extremely unlikely to achieve something significant and difficult without first defining the objective and then developing a plan around that objective. The fact that DALPA refuses to do this with restoration tells me everything I need to know about their intentions. And when my reps go along with that, it tells me everything I need to know about them.
Originally Posted by LeineLodge
(Post 1722632)
While you're at it, name a few reps that DO meet your standard.
Originally Posted by LeineLodge
(Post 1722632)
I'm not a rep, and hopefully never will be,
Originally Posted by LeineLodge
(Post 1722632)
but I have been generally very impressed with the high level respect they have for the responsibility they have been entrusted with. I've sat in the back of the room and watched them agonize over difficult decisions - sometimes there just isn't a good answer.
But you don't ever give up on something that's important to you... unless you've predetermined that it's not possible. And THAT is where I think the real disagreement is. I believe restoration IS possible. Definitely not easy, but possible. Most of those in the MEC over the past decade either believe or have been willing to go along with the belief that restoration is not possible because it would take "unreasonable" improvements. Since it's mathematically impossible to recover from unreasonable losses with reasonable increases within any kind of reasonable time frame, then ipso facto DALPA believes restoration is off the table. And we've spent the past decade telegraphing to the whole world that we believe it's off the table! :eek:
Originally Posted by LeineLodge
(Post 1722632)
It is a considerable personal sacrifice for them, and your continuous, public contempt for them (specifically the 44 guys) is uncalled for. Objective disagreement is healthy and necessary. Insinuating/stating that they are career politicians, too weak to do the right thing, is simply incorrect.
Show a little class. :rolleyes: My reps have continually disappointed me for the past decade. As far as I'm concerned, this restoration as an objective thing is not negotiable. If a rep doesn't support restoration, then that's a non starter for me. I've seen too many examples of flips flops once someone gets elected as a rep and too many examples of political non-answers to input. I call it the way I see it. If you don't like it... tough. |
Originally Posted by LeineLodge
(Post 1722682)
Absolutely not.
I should qualify my previous post as "my impression/opinion" of 88 Driver's position. He continuously runs their names through the mud...if it's warranted then fine, but imo he would be far more effective if he aired his dirty laundry with them directly, instead of smearing them on here. If 88 wants to share with us how my reps mislead him, I would be more than interested to hear it - PM is fine. It's been my experience, after dealing with all 4 of them personally, that they are standup individuals. If he has information to the contrary, then I'd like to know. However (and this was the genesis of my previous post) if he simply doesn't like the way things have played out, it doesn't mean that he was mislead. Additionally, he shouldn't be surprised if they are less than enthused to hear from him, after he frequently, and publicly, slams them. I stand by my statement that if he can show me a better way I will absolutely vote for him next time around. It just isn't as simple as he (or any of us, really) wants it to be. I'd love to be able to post some of my email exchanges here. I think it would be very eye opening to many. But there's a little legal disclaimer at the bottom of all those rep's emails that says I can't do that. And since I don't want to get in legal trouble, I think I'll pass on that. ;) FWIW, here's my short assessment on the current ATL reps: HC - Doesn't like me from the get-go from the old DALPA Forum. He knows he's not going to change my opinion so he doesn't even try. Just gives me legalistic/political "noted" type answers without really saying anything. Total waste of my effort even taking the time to send him any input. DH - Great guy. By far the most non-political of the whole bunch. Ultimately though, he seems to go along with the thinking of the others. I don't see him standing up and going against the grain of the DALPA political machine. AG - Another great guy. He and I couldn't disagree more on Delta pilot issues. But he's gone out of his way to be extremely nice and respectful to me whenever I've run into him in person. That really impresses me. He's about as far to the other end of the spectrum from my way of thinking as a person could get... but he doesn't make it personal. And he always answers my emails and debates respectfully. I greatly respect that... even though I'd rather not have people who think like him representing me. Outside of Delta pilot/DALPA issues, I think we could be good friends. DN - I strongly supported him the first time he ran and lost. After that, he totally changed his positions on just about everything. I do not respect that at all and did not support him when he ran this last time. Corresponding with him is extremely painful and frustrating because he so careful crafts his words so that sometimes it sounds like he's saying what he thinks I want to hear but it's worded in a way where it gives him an out. I hate that kind of crap. And, ultimately, he seems to go along with the DALPA political machine too... which means (you guessed it) restoration is off the table. UNSAT. |
So is there any correlation with our 747's being parked and Virgin Atlantic starting up increased service with I'm guessing here... 747's???
|
Originally Posted by TheWagman
(Post 1722857)
So is there any correlation with our 747's being parked and Virgin Atlantic starting up increased service with I'm guessing here... 747's???
As far as I can tell, we don't really have any protections with integrating VA into our network, but they're integrated. |
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1722797)
I don't know what generated all this talk about getting me banned, and it would be good for me if I wound up somehow with a lifetime ban, but I just wanted to tell you that....
BUTCH..... Gets it. VFL, GBO. |
I feel like 717s look shorter in the Delta paint scheme vs the AirTran paint scheme. Does anyone know if our 717s are shorter then theirs?
|
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 1722863)
I feel like 717s look shorter in the Delta paint scheme vs the AirTran paint scheme. Does anyone know if our 717s are shorter then theirs?
So, yeah, I think they are shorter than airtrans'. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:52 PM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands