Bartels
06-07-2016 | 05:49 AM
#31
Works Every Weekend
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,506
Likes: 0
From: 737 ATL
Harwood does offer one legitimate criticism in my opinion.
The fact that Bartels is an ALPA lifer. A "career ALPA pilot".
I don't think that's healthy.
At some point you become more of a politician than a pilot. Bartels perhaps being Exhibit A.
JMHO.
The fact that Bartels is an ALPA lifer. A "career ALPA pilot".
I don't think that's healthy.
At some point you become more of a politician than a pilot. Bartels perhaps being Exhibit A.
JMHO.
06-07-2016 | 05:58 AM
#33
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 4,116
Likes: 1
I could not care less about 2 alpa dogs fighting over a bone.
What I do care about is his characterizations of relative value and attempts, yet once again, of managing expectations and results down.
He has done nothing but reveal himself as a de facto agent of management.
Guess he missed that whole 'Aim High' course.
What I do care about is his characterizations of relative value and attempts, yet once again, of managing expectations and results down.
He has done nothing but reveal himself as a de facto agent of management.
Guess he missed that whole 'Aim High' course.
06-07-2016 | 06:03 AM
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 6,152
Likes: 215
Bingo.
Harwood wrote that to go after Bartels for one simple reason: He believes (and has convinced others) that Bartels ran a "misinformation" campaign and without him, the TA wouldn't have failed. There is nothing more to it than that.
Harwood is the token snake in the grass sore loser. His product got shot down, and he wants a scapegoat. Freaking pathetic. He can't accept that he under delivered and what was going to happen happened. He cannot accept that he failed...after all, he is the smartest man in the room.
Bartels is one vote. One. TA 2015 failed in an unprecedented manner for one reason: it was a poor product.
Harwood wrote that to go after Bartels for one simple reason: He believes (and has convinced others) that Bartels ran a "misinformation" campaign and without him, the TA wouldn't have failed. There is nothing more to it than that.
Harwood is the token snake in the grass sore loser. His product got shot down, and he wants a scapegoat. Freaking pathetic. He can't accept that he under delivered and what was going to happen happened. He cannot accept that he failed...after all, he is the smartest man in the room.
Bartels is one vote. One. TA 2015 failed in an unprecedented manner for one reason: it was a poor product.
Harwood is a very smart guy. But his successes has lead him into denial when he failed. His message maybe true, but to catch an ear of folks again he must acknowledge his own failure, NA2015.
I voted yes for it and I know acknowledge it was a seriously flawed product that was promoted as a pathway to more mainline growth that was coming anyway. I believed ALPA when they said RA doesn't give 2nd chances and United will grab the 190s. Not only did more SNB aircraft come anyway it ended up being 75 state of the art Cseries instead of 20 ratted out E190s.
After profit sharing horse trade a 15% raise over 3 years is not remotely worth the sick leave changes and 75% of OE trips. A strong argument can be made that the concessions fully funded the raise. He and the rest of the Moakists that were cast out must realize they were overconfident, and misread the desires of the pilot group. They screwed up. It happens.
The smartest guy in the room is the guy that realizes his mistake and quickly learns from it.
06-07-2016 | 06:13 AM
#35
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 4,116
Likes: 1
He is incapable of such an epiphany, let alone publicly articulating that reformation.
Given your last post, the question is have/can you make such a public declaration?
dating from the days of the old dalpa forum.......RH proved that if you repeatedly tell people you are the smartest guy in the room..... some will eventually end up believing it.
This essay is simply the latest installment in his uninterrupted campaign of that assertion.
Given your last post, the question is have/can you make such a public declaration?
dating from the days of the old dalpa forum.......RH proved that if you repeatedly tell people you are the smartest guy in the room..... some will eventually end up believing it.
This essay is simply the latest installment in his uninterrupted campaign of that assertion.
06-07-2016 | 06:33 AM
#36
Banned
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 430
Likes: 0
He is incapable of such an epiphany, let alone publicly articulating that reformation.
Given your last post, the question is have/can you make such a public declaration?
dating from the days of the old dalpa forum.......RH proved that if you repeatedly tell people you are the smartest guy in the room..... some will eventually end up believing it.
This essay is simply the latest installment in his uninterrupted campaign of that assertion.
Given your last post, the question is have/can you make such a public declaration?
dating from the days of the old dalpa forum.......RH proved that if you repeatedly tell people you are the smartest guy in the room..... some will eventually end up believing it.
This essay is simply the latest installment in his uninterrupted campaign of that assertion.
06-07-2016 | 06:35 AM
#37
Snake
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Lots of labels here, but no refutations, and no rebuttals of the subject's history. Interesting.
Promise the moon. Create scapegoats. Make bigger promises than your enemies. Lose at the table, and get jammed by a third party. Blame the scapegoats. Repeat.
Malone writes the simple truth. If you want the full spectrum of section six, we need to accommodate the legitimate business objectives of the company. Whether you want a market based deal, or release to self help, you're getting neither without that element. You need to show that you're serious about the deal, or the mediator simply won't play with you, and time will stand still. Like it is right now.
The council comms since then have shown that the reps are scared of the Orange Crush. They either write NOTHING, as C44 has chosen, or they double down on stupidity, and treat the opener like a suicide note, as seen in the shrill and juvenile rants of C1 and C66.
I had hope for Malone. I knew he was sharp, and could get a TA that would pass the membership. Any TA he could get will probably die on the table during this week's MEC meeting, all to appease the Orange Crush and serve the ambition of a few reps who have done nothing to put money in our pockets, and at present are taking money out of our pockets with their willful ignorance.
Pander. Slander. Promise the moon. Blame Moak. Get re elected. Repeat. It's been working since 2008, why stop now?
Promise the moon. Create scapegoats. Make bigger promises than your enemies. Lose at the table, and get jammed by a third party. Blame the scapegoats. Repeat.
Malone writes the simple truth. If you want the full spectrum of section six, we need to accommodate the legitimate business objectives of the company. Whether you want a market based deal, or release to self help, you're getting neither without that element. You need to show that you're serious about the deal, or the mediator simply won't play with you, and time will stand still. Like it is right now.
The council comms since then have shown that the reps are scared of the Orange Crush. They either write NOTHING, as C44 has chosen, or they double down on stupidity, and treat the opener like a suicide note, as seen in the shrill and juvenile rants of C1 and C66.
I had hope for Malone. I knew he was sharp, and could get a TA that would pass the membership. Any TA he could get will probably die on the table during this week's MEC meeting, all to appease the Orange Crush and serve the ambition of a few reps who have done nothing to put money in our pockets, and at present are taking money out of our pockets with their willful ignorance.
Pander. Slander. Promise the moon. Blame Moak. Get re elected. Repeat. It's been working since 2008, why stop now?
06-07-2016 | 06:39 AM
#38
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 4,116
Likes: 1
If you two can't ascertain the pertinent 'substance' to the letter is the author telling this group the re-opener is "outrageous and unachievable"...... well I can't help you.
Just a wild guess on my part...... but I do not think the majority of this group would have either one of those descriptors in their vocabulary tool box to characterize the re-opener.
Just a wild guess on my part...... but I do not think the majority of this group would have either one of those descriptors in their vocabulary tool box to characterize the re-opener.
06-07-2016 | 06:53 AM
#39
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,108
Likes: 0
06-07-2016 | 07:02 AM
#40
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,108
Likes: 0
Lots of labels here, but no refutations, and no rebuttals of the subject's history. Interesting.
Promise the moon. Create scapegoats. Make bigger promises than your enemies. Lose at the table, and get jammed by a third party. Blame the scapegoats. Repeat.
Malone writes the simple truth. If you want the full spectrum of section six, we need to accommodate the legitimate business objectives of the company. Whether you want a market based deal, or release to self help, you're getting neither without that element. You need to show that you're serious about the deal, or the mediator simply won't play with you, and time will stand still. Like it is right now.
The council comms since then have shown that the reps are scared of the Orange Crush. They either write NOTHING, as C44 has chosen, or they double down on stupidity, and treat the opener like a suicide note, as seen in the shrill and juvenile rants of C1 and C66.
I had hope for Malone. I knew he was sharp, and could get a TA that would pass the membership. Any TA he could get will probably die on the table during this week's MEC meeting, all to appease the Orange Crush and serve the ambition of a few reps who have done nothing to put money in our pockets, and at present are taking money out of our pockets with their willful ignorance.
Pander. Slander. Promise the moon. Blame Moak. Get re elected. Repeat. It's been working since 2008, why stop now?
Promise the moon. Create scapegoats. Make bigger promises than your enemies. Lose at the table, and get jammed by a third party. Blame the scapegoats. Repeat.
Malone writes the simple truth. If you want the full spectrum of section six, we need to accommodate the legitimate business objectives of the company. Whether you want a market based deal, or release to self help, you're getting neither without that element. You need to show that you're serious about the deal, or the mediator simply won't play with you, and time will stand still. Like it is right now.
The council comms since then have shown that the reps are scared of the Orange Crush. They either write NOTHING, as C44 has chosen, or they double down on stupidity, and treat the opener like a suicide note, as seen in the shrill and juvenile rants of C1 and C66.
I had hope for Malone. I knew he was sharp, and could get a TA that would pass the membership. Any TA he could get will probably die on the table during this week's MEC meeting, all to appease the Orange Crush and serve the ambition of a few reps who have done nothing to put money in our pockets, and at present are taking money out of our pockets with their willful ignorance.
Pander. Slander. Promise the moon. Blame Moak. Get re elected. Repeat. It's been working since 2008, why stop now?
And we need to address them!!
I couple more rounds with guys like you in charge and we would be working 30 days a month and sharing rooms at the Motel 6.
Our contract is a joke. It is filled with enough loopholes to allow each and every Delta pilot to do the work of 2 Delta pilots.
If we went to a hard 75 hour cap we would need a minimum of 2000 more captains.
And you want to give more??
The only way this makes sense is if you are a 777A
Or you are.......
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
