![]() |
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
(Post 844785)
Just a point, the BK judges did not throw out the NWA or DAL contracts. LOA's were TAed and voted on in both filings. The pilots then voted on these changes under the threat of solvency and a judge throwing the contracts out. No action was taken, just the threat of it.
Did you really rob the bank? Or did the teller "voluntarily" give you the money because that looked like the best alternative at the time? |
Originally Posted by Boomer
(Post 844943)
Kinda like if you go into a bank and point a gun at a teller and they give you a bag of money, but you never actually pull the trigger.
Did you really rob the bank? Or did the teller "voluntarily" give you the money because that looked like the best alternative at the time? |
Originally Posted by Boomer
(Post 844943)
Kinda like if you go into a bank and point a gun at a teller and they give you a bag of money, but you never actually pull the trigger.
Did you really rob the bank? Or did the teller "voluntarily" give you the money because that looked like the best alternative at the time? I am not discrediting the threat. Pilots realize the danger with the Judge allowing the company to impose a contract, and take it seriously, that threat was never converted. Yes, the companies used the leverage of the court, but it was the threat of action, not the action itself. It really is an unknown since it was never used. Good thing too, but we came to an "agreement" the judge did not allow a contract to be thrown out and a new one imposed. Ego my point. |
I think a better analogy is someone walking into a bank and handing the teller a note: "I have a bomb. I'll set it off if you don't give me $10,000." Does he have a bomb, and will he use it? No idea, but the consequences of guessing wrongly are too high, so you give the guy the money. (Actually you trip the silent alarm and stall for time, but that ruins the analogy!)
Nobody knew whether the judge would really throw out the entire contract, or whether he might just impose the "everything DC9 and smaller is outsourced" scope section the company was proposing. But the simple threat of either of those outcomes was enough to convince the pilot groups that NewCo (in the case of NWA, and various numbers of outsourced 76-seaters everywhere else) was more acceptable. |
Compass guys just got an update from our MEC in thier email box. Proposals were issued at the "big meeting" on wednesday. Everybody is now reviewing them. No mention of future meeting dates.
|
Originally Posted by RiddleEagle18
(Post 845029)
Compass guys just got an update from our MEC in thier email box. Proposals were issued at the "big meeting" on wednesday. Everybody is now reviewing them. No mention of future meeting dates.
TYG |
Originally Posted by TenYearsGone
(Post 845079)
That darn saying, "I" before "E" except after "C" does not work on the word "THEIR"
TYG I guess they don't teach spelling at Embry Riddle. :D |
U gusy are graet. Anwyays the inof is out theer.
|
Originally Posted by cfitstew
(Post 845142)
I guess they don't teach spelling at Embry Riddle. :D
Yea what a dumbass, I don't want that guy working at MY company. |
Don't worry I'll get stew back on the next plane swap :D
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:06 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands