Search
Notices

Karbon Aviator II

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11-02-2019, 09:29 PM
  #31  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2012
Position: 1900D CA
Posts: 3,394
Default

Originally Posted by CrewRest View Post
Maybe they will require aviator sunglasses to wear w/ the hat and jacket!!
And cowboy boots
Aero1900 is offline  
Old 11-02-2019, 09:33 PM
  #32  
ILL BEE DAT
 
Salukipilot4590's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: Rollin' Down tha 405
Posts: 2,550
Default

Originally Posted by Aero1900 View Post
And cowboy boots
Don't knock em till you try em!
Salukipilot4590 is offline  
Old 11-03-2019, 04:54 AM
  #33  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2012
Position: 1900D CA
Posts: 3,394
Default

Originally Posted by Salukipilot4590 View Post
Don't knock em till you try em!
I wasnt knocking them. I was just thinking how discombobulated a uniform it would be to have cowboy boots, slacks, a North Face, aviators and a pilot hat. Maybe a mullet or a man bun would be appropriate
Aero1900 is offline  
Old 11-03-2019, 06:09 AM
  #34  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: May 2017
Posts: 453
Default

Originally Posted by Aero1900 View Post
I wasnt knocking them. I was just thinking how discombobulated a uniform it would be to have cowboy boots, slacks, a North Face, aviators and a pilot hat. Maybe a mullet or a man bun would be appropriate
Case in point why this whole Karbon; but only if you wear a hat. And if not then you can wear the trench with or without a hat is completely silly.

By definition a "uniform" should be, ...well uniform.

Ditch the trench, if that's important to them, and dictate either Karbon, or Blazer. No hat required. Simple.
Wheelswatch is offline  
Old 11-03-2019, 06:20 AM
  #35  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jan 2014
Posts: 228
Default

Originally Posted by Wheelswatch View Post
Case in point why this whole Karbon; but only if you wear a hat. And if not then you can wear the trench with or without a hat is completely silly.

By definition a "uniform" should be, ...well uniform.

Ditch the trench, if that's important to them, and dictate either Karbon, or Blazer. No hat required. Simple.
As soon as they “dictate” it is considered a change to the uniform and they have to pay for it. As much as Barry wants everyone to look sharp and uniform, he doesn’t want it enough to pay for it. Thus the absurdity of this whole process.
monkeybrains is offline  
Old 11-03-2019, 06:22 AM
  #36  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: May 2017
Posts: 453
Default

Originally Posted by monkeybrains View Post
As soon as they “dictate” it is considered a change to the uniform and they have to pay for it. As much as Barry wants everyone to look sharp and uniform, he doesn’t want it enough to pay for it. Thus the absurdity of this whole process.
Oh I agree. They would have to pay for all of it!
Wheelswatch is offline  
Old 11-03-2019, 06:30 AM
  #37  
Slave
 
Joined APC: Oct 2016
Position: Hot tub
Posts: 1,348
Default

Bla bla bla............
Until the “palace” starts supporting $$$$$$ gate a n ramp our “appearance “ means NOTHING when the operation is a joke.
ReserveCA is offline  
Old 11-03-2019, 07:58 AM
  #38  
Gets Weekends Off
 
FlyingR6's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2008
Position: F9 FO
Posts: 370
Default

Originally Posted by DrJekyll MrHyde View Post
$420k pays the annual salary of one of their VPs; they’re not going to express that kind of good will.
You're definitely not wrong here, however, that kind of money pays for.. like 60 flights worth of fuel, 2 weeks of hotels, how many tires and oil cans we go through?

It's a cost of doing business.

They do everything in bad faith, that's the problem.
FlyingR6 is offline  
Old 11-04-2019, 02:25 PM
  #39  
Line Holder
 
Cardinal's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Posts: 93
Default

We conceded $7 million for (among other things) optional hats back in 2008. It was a negotiated, ratified, and signed agreement. Let us not forget the history.
Cardinal is offline  
Old 11-04-2019, 02:40 PM
  #40  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Aug 2016
Position: Bus CA
Posts: 658
Default

Originally Posted by Cardinal View Post
We conceded $7 million for (among other things) optional hats back in 2008. It was a negotiated, ratified, and signed agreement. Let us not forget the history.
I do think there is an argument to be made by our union that the company introduced a new uniform option that they claim is outside the contract by declaring that “it’s optional.” The “it’s optional” slippery slope that could be used against us in many areas of the contract that are far more important than hats! This is the union’s fight, I wouldn’t protest it out on the line by being out of compliance.
DrJekyll MrHyde is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
tango1998
Southwest
112
12-09-2020 05:28 PM
Boatfly
FedEx
41
03-12-2019 03:38 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices