Only time and money will tell. You have already lost, now you want to throw more money down the same rathole?

There is never a problem finding an entire building full of lawyers to take on any cause you have in mind for billable hours. They will never have any doubts about winning, at least to your face, as long as you are paying the bills.

Legal action against government and/or its agencies has a very low probability of success.

Now, can anyone tell me exactly what was lost? What could be gained?

I totally agree. We should all just quit resisting the company's interests and let them have their way. I mean, its worked out so well for us in the past and the company always knows best anyway. You know, very low probability and everything. GMAFB.

What was lost and what could be gained? Really?

Using that logic, we would still have segregation and women would not be able to vote.

Glad not everyone out there gives up as easily. What is given up? Equal work conditions for starters!

Jungle said the same thing about TCAS.

Who put this guy in here as a moderator? Only NURPS apply?

I'm new to cargo flying but it seems to me that everyone is pretty happy about the pay and benefits at the company I'm with, as am I. I'm also very familiar with the "law if unintended consequences". (Yeah, I got married)
What I'm trying to learn (and all I can find is the fact that people are angry over the cargo cut out, got it) is what it would it really mean, goods and bad, to our schedules, lifestyle, pay and benefits ect. My thought is that it would mean more pilots to hire to move the same amount of freight = less money ( hours) to each pilot. Part of me is in agreement that if it's safe practice or process then implement it across the board. The other part of me thinks that I know what I signed up for and do not want the law of unintended consequences or worse an uneducated decision be made that might change the entire landscape of the company that I work at. So what is gained,what is lost and at what expense ? Has anyone really spelled this out? Im a knuckle dragger so i cant but any information on where to find this would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you for your time.

You can't answer the question, but that is ok we'll get to that later.
Non sequitur, but we will get to that later.



Just a lie, easily shown by a data base search.

You are thinking, and that is beautiful.

////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

So much anger and so little direction, I invite anyone to show the effects and the cause.

Much of the anger is caused by what some view as an ethical failure, if that is the case we must also ask if both parties of the transaction are corrupt. Who would have gotten a bundle of non-sequential bills to place in the freezer?

Of course some may view it as precedent, and I suspect that word will come up often as the issue is explored further.

You should post better than that. You are compromising your future credibility. Put up, or shut up.

The government just paid out huge on a 2008 F-18 crash.

Go write an MRB or make some coffee sonny, chop chop.

Pffffffft....

Well, if huge is less than half the cost of a single aircraft, you may have a point.

In July 2010, Yoon sued Boeing and the United States government for an unspecified amount. In the suit, Yoon alleges that the government violated many of its procedures in its operation of the mishap aircraft and that Boeing was responsible for the defects in the aircraft's fuel systems which caused the crash.[21] Yoon later stated that the compensation offer from the US government for the loss of his four family members and his home was "insulting". Yoon's lawsuit against the US Navy was heard in a federal district court in San Diego in December 2011.[23] On 28 December 2011, U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Miller awarded Yoon, his father-in-law, and mother-in-law's three adult children a total of $17.8 million in damage compensation from the U.S. government

It really is not clear who will pay the damages, but the real point is that you can cherry pick and completely miss the real probability.

Chop Chop son, you will have to do better than that to build a case.

The actual payout is still unknown, and will likely be far less than the stated amount, but it makes a good story.

What you really are trying to say is that the UPS/Fedex actuarial science is faulty, but you have no idea of the actual data involved and just want to venture a wild guess. Understandable, but not reasonable.

That's not the end of the payout, much of which will be sealed with non-disclosures. Point is the govermnent is not invincible, and occasionally the right thing happens. And in this case I think it's a chess move for IPA, not checkers. No doubt you would have counselled the IPA to just give up in the beginning...insurmountable odds in your myopic vision no doubt against UPS. Yet effective 1/1 we're the highest paid group in the industry.

Now back to your regularly scheduled all knowing.