New Mesa Thread
07-31-2015, 06:01 PM
#181
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,602
True a room probably goes unused every night in CLT.
07-31-2015, 06:09 PM
#182
sippin' dat koolaid
Joined APC: Jun 2013
Position: gear slinger
Posts: 982
Originally Posted by 121again
A lot of FAs and pilots live in the outstations.
07-31-2015, 06:13 PM
#183
sippin' dat koolaid
Joined APC: Jun 2013
Position: gear slinger
Posts: 982
Originally Posted by Two Kings
What an embarrassment to the profession. Unbelievable. Make sure to take off your uniform before you sleep on the floor in the terminal guys.
07-31-2015, 06:22 PM
#184
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2013
Posts: 10,102
Originally Posted by tinman1
Calm your tits bro, this isn't mandatory.
07-31-2015, 06:27 PM
#185
Chief Engineer
Joined APC: Aug 2014
Position: CRJ FO
Posts: 815
Originally Posted by CBreezy
That's not the point. The fact that they are offering money to not use hotels is embarrassing. Especially since it is worth more than an hour of flight pay for new FOs
07-31-2015, 07:00 PM
#187
Covfefe
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 3,001
So the company gives us money in lieu of a service we don't use, and now we get ****ed about it. Like when I overnight where my dad lives, and I stay with him instead of the crappy hotel, and pocket an extra $25, I should be ****ed? I don't understand that logic. Previously the company gave us nothing, now we get something.
If this new thing results in people sleeping in airports, couch surfing, etc., that's on the gross individuals, not the company (don't think it will). I wouldn't double up to save $25 either. My privacy is worth that.
Usually we complain when a company takes something away or implements a crappy non-optional policy. This is optional and can give us cash. I don't understand the complaints.
If this new thing results in people sleeping in airports, couch surfing, etc., that's on the gross individuals, not the company (don't think it will). I wouldn't double up to save $25 either. My privacy is worth that.
Usually we complain when a company takes something away or implements a crappy non-optional policy. This is optional and can give us cash. I don't understand the complaints.
07-31-2015, 07:11 PM
#188
sippin' dat koolaid
Joined APC: Jun 2013
Position: gear slinger
Posts: 982
Originally Posted by BeatNavy
So the company gives us money in lieu of a service we don't use, and now we get ****ed about it. Like when I overnight where my dad lives, and I stay with him instead of the crappy hotel, and pocket an extra $25, I should be ****ed? I don't understand that logic. Previously the company gave us nothing, now we get something.
If this new thing results in people sleeping in airports, couch surfing, etc., that's on the gross individuals, not the company (don't think it will). I wouldn't double up to save $25 either. My privacy is worth that.
Usually we complain when a company takes something away or implements a crappy non-optional policy. This is optional and can give us cash. I don't understand the complaints.
If this new thing results in people sleeping in airports, couch surfing, etc., that's on the gross individuals, not the company (don't think it will). I wouldn't double up to save $25 either. My privacy is worth that.
Usually we complain when a company takes something away or implements a crappy non-optional policy. This is optional and can give us cash. I don't understand the complaints.
I don't think it should be encouraged by the company but it's not a bad deal for those who already don't occupy a room on certain overnights.
07-31-2015, 07:12 PM
#189
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2013
Position: men without hats
Posts: 369
Somebody explain to me why we're p-ssed off again? Because the company is offering financial incentives to reallocate an otherwise unused resource?
Rabble rabble! Where's my pitchfork?!
Rabble rabble! Where's my pitchfork?!
07-31-2015, 07:13 PM
#190
Chief Engineer
Joined APC: Aug 2014
Position: CRJ FO
Posts: 815
Originally Posted by BeatNavy
So the company gives us money in lieu of a service we don't use, and now we get ****ed about it. Like when I overnight where my dad lives, and I stay with him instead of the crappy hotel, and pocket an extra $25, I should be ****ed? I don't understand that logic. Previously the company gave us nothing, now we get something.
If this new thing results in people sleeping in airports, couch surfing, etc., that's on the gross individuals, not the company (don't think it will). I wouldn't double up to save $25 either. My privacy is worth that.
Usually we complain when a company takes something away or implements a crappy non-optional policy. This is optional and can give us cash. I don't understand the complaints.
If this new thing results in people sleeping in airports, couch surfing, etc., that's on the gross individuals, not the company (don't think it will). I wouldn't double up to save $25 either. My privacy is worth that.
Usually we complain when a company takes something away or implements a crappy non-optional policy. This is optional and can give us cash. I don't understand the complaints.
I think the complaints are more geared towards that now the company has an excuse for not updating some of the hotel choices. In which most (not all) are horrendous. I kind of think of it as a band-aid rather than fixing one of the problems which is ****ty hotels. Some of which make us pay for a cab if it's late enough and the hotel shuttle isn't running.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
