|
Originally Posted by slowplay
(Post 1046028)
There you go again...:(
Slow, what is your opinion of the Compass vote in light of the scope concerns being raised by our pilot group? Is the vote not indicative of long standing policy?
Originally Posted by slowplay
(Post 1046029)
I know folks who have.
|
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 1046033)
True then, true now.
|
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 1046033)
Slow, what is your opinion of the Compass vote in light of the scope concerns being raised by our pilot group? Is the vote not indicative of long standing policy?
We've plowed this ground repeatedly and you know my opinion. The Compass structure was set up to fail. The MEC made the call to ensure Compass had adequate representation in the event they were spun off. With the benefit of hindsight it's my view that the call was the correct one. I understand you disagree. In all our discussions I don't recall you ever acknowledging that the representational structure would not prevent a sale of the CPZ certificate, that the structure was flawed, and there was no methodology to force management to add the CPZ pilots to our seniority list. Even then, there was no way to compel management to modify our scope as it pertained to 76 seat jets. |
Originally Posted by slowplay
(Post 1046026)
As to the item in red....:p
As far as to the rest, Swelbar is in academia but isn't really an academic (masters degree only). While I strongly disagree with his hack piece ACL posted, he does have the background to belie your argument. He has been an LEC Chair as a flight attendant, so he has a labor leadership background. He started his own airline (AirTran) just 3 years after finishing grad school, then sold it in 1998 to the then ValuJet. He started Eclat consulting in 2001 which became one of the leading mouthpiece houses in the post 9-11 airline world. They got big because they were balanced, including former airline managers, labor leaders, and financiers in their consultant stable. So he'd probably read your piece and say you should do a little more homework and come back with a more cogent argument! So he's a flight attendant? BTW, what is Airtran inc? It says he was the founder? Is that AirTran Airways? Airtran Airways was owned by AirTran Corporation prior to the Valujet acquisition after flight 592 crash. I figured AirTran Corporation was based in MCO. I can't find any record of Airtran Inc in Arlington VA. Is it just another consulting gig? But for someone who started an airline... he sure doesn't do much to promote that in his bio: http://www.swelblog.com/storage/SwelbarBio.pdf I think that's odd. That'd be my #1 thing I'd tell people, "I'm the founder of an airline..." Also, more importantly, does he have tenure at MIT? |
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 1046040)
Also, more importantly, does he have tenure at MIT? Nice job on the really fast edit...;) |
Originally Posted by slowplay
(Post 1046026)
As to the item in red....:p
! Not talking about employee, talking about being a pilot. |
Originally Posted by slowplay
(Post 1046042)
Don't know and really don't care. It is an interesting "scope" argument, though.
Nice job on the really fast edit...;) But I think there is something to be said about someone who may be on tenure or seeking tenure to talk about scope... there's an h word that comes to mind. |
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 1046045)
But I think there is something to be said about someone who may be on tenure or seeking tenure to talk about scope... there's an h word that comes to mind.
|
Originally Posted by Ferd149
(Post 1046010)
Sounds like the professor type who has never actually worked in the industry?
|
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 1046043)
Question Slow, are you saying I'm not a good pilot?
Not talking about employee, talking about being a pilot. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:26 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands