Airline Pilot Central Forums - CRS

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- FedEx (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/fedex/)

- - CRS - Complete Joke (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/fedex/94780-crs-complete-joke.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by FDXLAG (Post 2121099)

Another idiot that thinks voting no would have gotten him his personal provision into the next contract. This wasn't on the table. I wish it were but it wasn't.

Yep. If everyone would read the thread, they would see that our negotiating committee took it off the table.

Quote:

Originally Posted by golfandfly (Post 2121104)

Quit being a tool. You whine more than anyone else on this forum and now you call someone an idiot for wanting to make changes to the contract..

We have the no voters simpering because they didn't get their way six months later and I am whining. You don't know the definition of the word.

Quote:

Originally Posted by FDXLAG (Post 2121150)

We have the no voters simpering because they didn't get their way six months later and I am whining. You don't know the definition of the word.

So you are whining or was that supposed to be a question? How would you know if he was "simpering?" Can you see him/her? Who's the idiot?

The vote is over, you lost, life goes on.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kwri10s (Post 2120433)

Not correct. The only "problem" with real time trading, is that according to the NC there will not be a time period where trips are sitting in open time waiting to be assigned.

They just didn't want to do little creative thinking and gave up.

If OTP was the big show stopper, there were definitely ways to make both options possible. Assuming the guy with OTP actually wants trips, then he puts in a request for trips (even dictates some specific criteria for what he might want), just like any general M/U request. But, obviously his request gets priority. The idea that he's going to wait around until something actually shows in OT to act is ridiculous. He either wants a trip or he doesn't. He puts in when and what he wants and he's done.

Now (assuming we had RTTT) when something pops into OT that meets his or anyone else's OTP request, they automatically get it based on time stamp of their request? seniority? I don't know? Whatever is in the rules.

If the trip doesn't meet any existing OTP requests in the system, then it's a standard food fight for that and any other trip in OT except in real time - not "when I get around to it" CRS time.

How hard would that have been?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dakota (Post 2121001)

NEVER going to happen. 57% of the guys probably think it's good the way it is. Just ask Albie, FDXLAG and ROCK. We have an industry leading contract.

Whose contract would you rather have? If they are hiring (they probably are) you should go there.

Quote:

Originally Posted by FDXLAG (Post 2121099)

Another idiot that thinks voting no would have gotten him his personal provision into the next contract. This wasn't on the table. I wish it were but it wasn't.

That is very progressive of you FDXLAG. So anyone who has a different opinion of our contract than you is an idiot. Got it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by FDXLAG (Post 2121202)

The vote is over, you lost, life goes on.

"Lost"? I didn't realize a contract was winning or losing among pilots.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goulet69 (Post 2122470)

That is very progressive of you FDXLAG. So anyone who has a different opinion of our contract than you is an idiot. Got it.

An idiot, dolt, dullard or (archaically) mome is a person perceived to be lacking intelligence, or someone who acts in a self-defeating or significantly counterproductive way.

If you think voting no would have gotten us real time trip trading you meet the self-defeating definition threshold. It was not on the table.

Quote:

Originally Posted by FDXLAG (Post 2122591)

With each subsequent post, you prove what a true piece of work you are.

And come on, let me have it!