Tony Romo
09-25-2015, 11:30 AM
#1
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Feb 2013
Posts: 613
Tony Romo
This is cut and paste off a post from jetflyers FB:
Probably my last post until my next post, and this post will be from a guy I have huge respect for because his opinions align with my own, and this guy really gets it, because this guy is me.
First, I get all teary-eyed like Terrell Owens defending his “quarterback” Tony Romo when folks attack my rep, Anita Shew. “That’s my rep, man. Don’t you see? That’s my rep!”
Yeah, I read her letter; I’ve read all the letters, and I even managed to read the TA, the latter of which, I do declare, the union must have sent out two difference versions. How does the TA I’m reading support an enthusiastic two thumbs up? So I’m confused, but that’s okay, I’m a Marine. Believe me, life was easier when the Corps told me what to wear and what to eat and whom to kill, but I digress.
My rep didn’t attack the negotiating committee. She pointed out a path going forward should this TA (or at least the version I’m reading) fail; much like our MEC Vice Chairman, Captain Cardacci did with his most recent comm. I think we call all agree 100 percent that our NC and subcommittees et al. worked hard, and so can we all agree to graduate past the notion that to question their results somehow condemns their efforts?
When folks tell me that I’m making an emotional decision, it gets me so mad I want to pull my hair out! I want to hold my breath and stomp my feet.
Yet … I am curious as to the origin of the notion that the best decisions have no basis in emotion. This, of course, leveled by several in the Yes camp, which, in my opinion, is a bit hypocritical, given how so much of their argument rests upon fear. What if this doesn’t pass? What if we lose money waiting on TA 2.0? What if the company wet leases? Who will step up to the plate to continue negotiations?
I would like to counter the negative, albeit powerful emotion of fear with the positive emotion that I see in the No camp. (Funny how the Yes here is negative, and the No positive.) Within the No camp, I read optimism for a better future. I read a unified group willing to fight for the love of their profession. I see little capitulation of that which we find in the Yes camp, this notion that yeah, I wanted more, and yeah, I’m disappointed, but shucks, this is the best we can do and so we might as well make the best of it, for me. Within the No camp, I see a fight against the direction our corporations are taking in America, and so I see a noble cause. Yeah, hokey for you Yes guys, but I’m a hokey, optimistic kind of guy! In the No camp, I see a group of folks who are seeing the erosion of their quality of lives; a group that has committed themselves to this company, and are asking not for what they deserve, but for what they have EARNED. A group that has spent countless hours and years on their profession, who are proud to work at FedEx, and who are feeling, perhaps, a bit disenfranchised. A group who wants to say to their kids and the youngsters thinking on becoming a pilot to go ahead and like Michael Jordan just do it, and when you get the hours come work for FedEx, ‘cause it’s awesome here, you’ll love it.
Someone said we are part owners in this company, but that is a false analogy when the trend in our country is ownership to shareholders, and workers are mere cost centers.
So yeah, I’ll say it: this is how the No camp is feeling, feelings of an almost human nature, but that doesn’t negate our analytical minds, nor blind us to the words we have read, the concessions, the loopholes.
Lastly, Terrell was wrong to shed any tears for Tony Romo. Tony Romo sucks!
Probably my last post until my next post, and this post will be from a guy I have huge respect for because his opinions align with my own, and this guy really gets it, because this guy is me.
First, I get all teary-eyed like Terrell Owens defending his “quarterback” Tony Romo when folks attack my rep, Anita Shew. “That’s my rep, man. Don’t you see? That’s my rep!”
Yeah, I read her letter; I’ve read all the letters, and I even managed to read the TA, the latter of which, I do declare, the union must have sent out two difference versions. How does the TA I’m reading support an enthusiastic two thumbs up? So I’m confused, but that’s okay, I’m a Marine. Believe me, life was easier when the Corps told me what to wear and what to eat and whom to kill, but I digress.
My rep didn’t attack the negotiating committee. She pointed out a path going forward should this TA (or at least the version I’m reading) fail; much like our MEC Vice Chairman, Captain Cardacci did with his most recent comm. I think we call all agree 100 percent that our NC and subcommittees et al. worked hard, and so can we all agree to graduate past the notion that to question their results somehow condemns their efforts?
When folks tell me that I’m making an emotional decision, it gets me so mad I want to pull my hair out! I want to hold my breath and stomp my feet.
Yet … I am curious as to the origin of the notion that the best decisions have no basis in emotion. This, of course, leveled by several in the Yes camp, which, in my opinion, is a bit hypocritical, given how so much of their argument rests upon fear. What if this doesn’t pass? What if we lose money waiting on TA 2.0? What if the company wet leases? Who will step up to the plate to continue negotiations?
I would like to counter the negative, albeit powerful emotion of fear with the positive emotion that I see in the No camp. (Funny how the Yes here is negative, and the No positive.) Within the No camp, I read optimism for a better future. I read a unified group willing to fight for the love of their profession. I see little capitulation of that which we find in the Yes camp, this notion that yeah, I wanted more, and yeah, I’m disappointed, but shucks, this is the best we can do and so we might as well make the best of it, for me. Within the No camp, I see a fight against the direction our corporations are taking in America, and so I see a noble cause. Yeah, hokey for you Yes guys, but I’m a hokey, optimistic kind of guy! In the No camp, I see a group of folks who are seeing the erosion of their quality of lives; a group that has committed themselves to this company, and are asking not for what they deserve, but for what they have EARNED. A group that has spent countless hours and years on their profession, who are proud to work at FedEx, and who are feeling, perhaps, a bit disenfranchised. A group who wants to say to their kids and the youngsters thinking on becoming a pilot to go ahead and like Michael Jordan just do it, and when you get the hours come work for FedEx, ‘cause it’s awesome here, you’ll love it.
Someone said we are part owners in this company, but that is a false analogy when the trend in our country is ownership to shareholders, and workers are mere cost centers.
So yeah, I’ll say it: this is how the No camp is feeling, feelings of an almost human nature, but that doesn’t negate our analytical minds, nor blind us to the words we have read, the concessions, the loopholes.
Lastly, Terrell was wrong to shed any tears for Tony Romo. Tony Romo sucks!
09-25-2015, 11:50 AM
#2
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: MD-11 Captain
Posts: 4,304
Originally Posted by Anthrax
Someone said we are part owners in this company, but that is a false analogy when the trend in our country is ownership to shareholders, and workers are mere cost centers.
I'm not exactly sure what Tony Romo has to do with our TA but ...
I've spent many years "feeling" like maybe (just maybe) I was a part owner in this company. I did my very best to save the Company a buck everywhere I could because ... if it's good for the Company, maybe that's good for our Customers and ... maybe that's good for OUR retirement!*?
If I was scheduled to deadhead from the west coast to my home on the east coast and I had a choice of First Class on 3 different airlines, I would take the cheapest one (sometimes this was a HUGE savings). I really would do the best job I could to save gas because, in my mind, I was getting paid to fly my airplane as if I owned it. If I owned it, I'd be doing my best to try to save gas. If the last leg of a deadhead was a taxi from the airport to my home, I would take the subway to the end of the line and take a taxi from there. It probably only saved $40 or $50 (and took me an extra hour to get home!) but that's how I would have traveled if I had been paying for it.
There are lots of other examples. I've (we've!) been a loyal, faithful, reliable hard working employee. I'm tired of being treated like an illegal farm worker and being told that I'm lucky to have a job.
I was wrong, I won't do it again ... I promise.
Disappointed ...
MM
Last edited by MaydayMark; 09-25-2015 at 12:10 PM.
09-25-2015, 02:14 PM
#4
"blue collar thug"!
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: A proponent of...
Posts: 1,614
I think that is a pretty good summary Anthrax. It seems that the no camp generally thinks the way you describe. And some of the things you mention do sound hokey. But until the collective mentality stands up for themselves the beatings will continue. A fractured society (pilot group) are putty in their hands.
Corporal Kurtz out!
Corporal Kurtz out!
09-25-2015, 11:44 PM
#6
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 113
Solid "No" vote here, but I have to stick up for my man Tony Romo. 
If guys like Brady, Manning, or Rodgers spent most of their careers on team with a horrible defense so the team was always playing from behind, no running game so the team could go head hunting for the QB, and a weak offensive line so that the QB was running for his life on almost every play, then I guarantee you they probably wouldn't have won a Super Bowl or earned MVP either.
Other than that 13-3 season in Romo's 2nd year as a starter, it has only been the last couple seasons where the Dallas defense has been worth a crap, with a running game that has to be honored, and an offensive line that can protect. And what do you see? A QB worthy of MVP consideration.
Quite frankly, it amazes me that Tony Romo has been as successful as he has, given what has had to work with most of the time.
I now return you to our regularly scheduled programing on why this TA should be voted down...
If guys like Brady, Manning, or Rodgers spent most of their careers on team with a horrible defense so the team was always playing from behind, no running game so the team could go head hunting for the QB, and a weak offensive line so that the QB was running for his life on almost every play, then I guarantee you they probably wouldn't have won a Super Bowl or earned MVP either.
Other than that 13-3 season in Romo's 2nd year as a starter, it has only been the last couple seasons where the Dallas defense has been worth a crap, with a running game that has to be honored, and an offensive line that can protect. And what do you see? A QB worthy of MVP consideration.
Quite frankly, it amazes me that Tony Romo has been as successful as he has, given what has had to work with most of the time.
I now return you to our regularly scheduled programing on why this TA should be voted down...
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
