O'Malley's rebuttal letter to C20
06-23-2012 | 02:19 PM
#1
Thread Starter
Da Hudge
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,473
Likes: 0
From: Poodle Whisperer
O'Malley's rebuttal letter to C20
Discuss here.
As per the other C20 letter, the content shall not be posted on this thread.
As per the other C20 letter, the content shall not be posted on this thread.
06-23-2012 | 02:26 PM
#3
Thread Starter
Da Hudge
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,473
Likes: 0
From: Poodle Whisperer
The same way you got to see Tom Tuckers letter- the ALPA forums or someone emailing it to you.
06-23-2012 | 02:34 PM
#5
Banned
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 623
Likes: 0
From: DAL
So, according to DALPA, this TA is not cost neutral.
That would mean RA, EB, et al are lying by telling Wall Street that it is cost neutral.
I'm pretty sure that would be illegal. Wire fraud, conspiracy, etc. etc.
Someone needs to alert the FBI. And the SEC too, for good measure.
...or maybe it's DALPA who is lying.
That would mean RA, EB, et al are lying by telling Wall Street that it is cost neutral.
I'm pretty sure that would be illegal. Wire fraud, conspiracy, etc. etc.
Someone needs to alert the FBI. And the SEC too, for good measure.
...or maybe it's DALPA who is lying.
06-23-2012 | 02:39 PM
#6
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,619
Likes: 0
Tucker's letter was not posted because he specifically forbade public posting. That is not in the Letter from Capt. O'Malley. There have been many letters posted from union officials with no problem. You can't erase the post unless there is objection from the author. It seems to me that you are abusing your position as Moderator to erase content you don't like.
06-23-2012 | 02:40 PM
#7
Banned
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,007
Likes: 0
From: Space Shuttle PIC
So, according to DALPA, this TA is not cost neutral.
That would mean RA, EB, et al are lying by telling Wall Street that it is cost neutral.
I'm pretty sure that would be illegal. Wire fraud, conspiracy, etc. etc.
Someone needs to alert the FBI. And the SEC too, for good measure.
...or maybe it's DALPA who is lying.
That would mean RA, EB, et al are lying by telling Wall Street that it is cost neutral.
I'm pretty sure that would be illegal. Wire fraud, conspiracy, etc. etc.
Someone needs to alert the FBI. And the SEC too, for good measure.
...or maybe it's DALPA who is lying.
Not to the pilots. The extra revenue generated by the 717s and 70 additional 76 seaters will be used to pay the raises FOR the pilots. That sounds great for us!
06-23-2012 | 02:40 PM
#8
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
So, according to DALPA, this TA is not cost neutral.
That would mean RA, EB, et al are lying by telling Wall Street that it is cost neutral.
I'm pretty sure that would be illegal. Wire fraud, conspiracy, etc. etc.
Someone needs to alert the FBI. And the SEC too, for good measure.
...or maybe it's DALPA who is lying.
That would mean RA, EB, et al are lying by telling Wall Street that it is cost neutral.
I'm pretty sure that would be illegal. Wire fraud, conspiracy, etc. etc.
Someone needs to alert the FBI. And the SEC too, for good measure.
...or maybe it's DALPA who is lying.
06-23-2012 | 02:41 PM
#9
Banned
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,007
Likes: 0
From: Space Shuttle PIC
Tucker's letter was not posted because he specifically forbade public posting. That is not in the Letter from Capt. O'Malley. There have been many letters posted from union officials with no problem. You can't erase the post unless there is objection from the author. It seems to me that you are abusing your position as Moderator to erase content you don't like.
06-23-2012 | 02:44 PM
#10
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
I said this in a different way before Bacon, but I really believe you are below average intelligence.
Last edited by Wingnutdal; 06-23-2012 at 02:54 PM. Reason: Accuracy
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
