Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
02-09-2015 | 01:03 PM
Banned
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
From: NYC A320 FO
No, it is patently unfair to construct a question asking what PS is worth in Pay only. That isn't spit balling. Spit balling would require an acknowledgement the entire PWA is up for improvement and suggestions for where best to use a newfound asset to leverage contractual gains. The premise of his question forces me to acknowledge that PS can only be leveraged to improve pay.
02-09-2015 | 01:08 PM
Works Every Weekend
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,506
Likes: 0
From: 737 ATL
02-09-2015 | 01:21 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
Likes: 0
He has the right to post his opinions, and yet I don't think anyone has the right to turn the L&G into the forum formerly known as the ALPA forum. I've never read chit-chat, but the people who cross over, manage to respect the (mostly) good-natured banter of the L&G.
Carl and sailing do have their moments, but who doesn't like to watch Grumpy Old Men?
02-09-2015 | 01:28 PM
On Reserve
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,886
Likes: 0
From: MSP7ERB
Hey guys, just block IAV84DAL like I did. Then he can come back under some other new account extolling the benefits of giving up profit sharing. Hearing one's opinion is fine, but hearing it incessantly at the expense of our normal discussions is detrimental.
02-09-2015 | 01:32 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
Likes: 0
If someone doesn't want to be ignored, and they make their threads qualify under the TOS, but controversial enough, they're going to be quoted incessantly. The ignore feature only goes so far.
I think the issue becomes this: when a poster is essentially spamming up the L&G, the mods should step in. Open lav8 another thread, just for the PS. It's basic intellectual honesty: if you can't follow the rhythm of the L&G, then you should have the intellectual honesty of creating a separate discussion.
Don't ban: re-direct.
I think the issue becomes this: when a poster is essentially spamming up the L&G, the mods should step in. Open lav8 another thread, just for the PS. It's basic intellectual honesty: if you can't follow the rhythm of the L&G, then you should have the intellectual honesty of creating a separate discussion.
Don't ban: re-direct.
02-09-2015 | 01:41 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,707
Likes: 0
From: Permanently scarred
33 House GOP members joined in writing a letter to Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx this past June urging him to reject the NAI bid, yet some of these members were not supported by the PAC. If the PAC were not concerned with which party a congressman was affiliated, it would seem supporting every single one of these 33 would be helpful to our cause.
02-09-2015 | 01:45 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
If someone doesn't want to be ignored, and they make their threads qualify under the TOS, but controversial enough, they're going to be quoted incessantly. The ignore feature only goes so far.
I think the issue becomes this: when a poster is essentially spamming up the L&G, the mods should step in. Open lav8 another thread, just for the PS. It's basic intellectual honesty: if you can't follow the rhythm of the L&G, then you should have the intellectual honesty of creating a separate discussion.
Don't ban: re-direct.
I think the issue becomes this: when a poster is essentially spamming up the L&G, the mods should step in. Open lav8 another thread, just for the PS. It's basic intellectual honesty: if you can't follow the rhythm of the L&G, then you should have the intellectual honesty of creating a separate discussion.
Don't ban: re-direct.
So adult and professional that I don't even know how to handle it. You and Elvis.
I'm in awe. If we were at the ECP overnight I'd buy you guys beers.
02-09-2015 | 01:48 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,707
Likes: 0
From: Permanently scarred
02-09-2015 | 01:48 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,207
Likes: 0
From: CA
I don't know how else to put it to you. I have shown the contractual language that proves Profit Sharing is part of SWAPA's negotiated compensation package. It can not be removed without a replacement. They can call that replacement compensation "double secret extra special pay" for all I care, but the fact remains that Profit Sharing is a contractually mandated compensation that cannot be removed without a replacement. Which portion of that fact do you not understand?
02-09-2015 | 02:38 PM
Banned
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
From: NYC A320 FO
So you come on here with your anti-PS agenda day after day after day and forum members are willing to engage you with a fair discussion, but when you're asked a simple, fair question you refuse to address it. Please, either man up and answer the question or move on to a different subject. Not answering it, but continuing on with your bloviating shows a lack of intellectual integrity and is quite annoying to the entire group.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
