Roadshow Discussion

Subscribe
12  18  19  20  21  22  23 
Page 22 of 23
Go to
Ok, now I’m convinced we’re being trolled. No one is this obtuse without it being intentional. I’m out.
Reply
Quote: If you have a beef with this scenario getting discussed, take it up with the person who keeps claiming pay protection exists in the face of black and white language pointing to it doesn't.

I'm not saying it's right, wrong, sane, or insane although I agree with you that it appears to be irrational.

I'm just saying that SWAPA says there is no pay protection. The company says there is no pay protection. The language says their is no pay protection. Only one person is promising pay protection.

I have offered a friendly wager to try to ease his pain of being wrong, but there has been no acceptance.

.
discuss whatever you want, my beef is with the fact that you are intentionally disregarding that it is AT THE COMPANY’S DISCRETION whether or not you get put back on the RAP, and that there are substantial logistical and financial incentives for them to just delay the flight and keep you on the trip instead of going through the trouble of finding a new pilot… unless you are essentially unable to make it at all, in which case you’re basically a no-show anyway.

You finally admitted it in your last post that they MAY take you off the trip without pay, and that it isn’t mandatory, which destroys your entire “argument” up until now; but again you are intentionally dodging the idea that doing so wouldn’t be in their best interest, except for when reaching the extremes in time and money lost. This is getting ridiculous, it’s eroding your credibility, and it’s tiresome. I’m very new here and even I can see right through it. God bless
Reply
Quote: discuss whatever you want, my beef is with the fact that you are intentionally disregarding that it is AT THE COMPANY’S DISCRETION whether or not you get put back on the RAP, and that there are substantial logistical and financial incentives for them to just delay the flight and keep you on the trip instead of going through the trouble of finding a new pilot… unless you are essentially unable to make it at all, in which case you’re basically a no-show anyway.

You finally admitted it in your last post that they MAY take you off the trip without pay, and that it isn’t mandatory, which destroys your entire “argument” up until now; but again you are intentionally dodging the idea that doing so wouldn’t be in their best interest, except for when reaching the extremes in time and money lost. This is getting ridiculous, it’s eroding your credibility, and it’s tiresome. I’m very new here and even I can see right through it. God bless
I'm talking about SWAPA saying it was NOT pay protected, and the black and white language saying it is NOT pay protected.

I actually DON'T have a problem with this. It is highly unlikely I will ever be in this position.

This whole thing started because a cheerleader kept saying it WAS pay protected.

I simply said "SWAPA says it's NOT".

Then I was chastised to "wait for the language".

When the TA was released and the language was posted.... guess what? It is NOT pay protected.

Again, I don't really care.

But what I do find very telling is that some cheerleaders can't accept what SWAPA says and can't accept black and white language on what apparently is an issue they are so emotionally invested in that they have to keep twisting logic so far around that they end up arguing against themselves!

All I can do is point to what SWAPA said, or point to the language.... I can't force delusional people to comprehend it.

And I don't really care because someone else was the one pushing this ridiculous notion that a reserve would be pay protected for premium in the first place! Not my battle or cup of tea anyway.

I have offered a friendly wager that if the pilot actually pushes to test this unlikely situation AND gets pay protected, I will buy a round. But if they lose the pay, they have to buy a round. So far no response?

.
Reply
Quote: I'm talking about SWAPA saying it was NOT pay protected, and the black and white language saying it is NOT pay protected.

I actually DON'T have a problem with this. It is highly unlikely I will ever be in this position.

This whole thing started because a cheerleader kept saying it WAS pay protected.

I simply said "SWAPA says it's NOT".

Then I was chastised to "wait for the language".

When the TA was released and the language was posted.... guess what? It is NOT pay protected.

Again, I don't really care.

But what I do find very telling is that some cheerleaders can't accept what SWAPA says and can't accept black and white language on what apparently is an issue they are so emotionally invested in that they have to keep twisting logic so far around that they end up arguing against themselves!

All I can do is point to what SWAPA said, or point to the language.... I can't force delusional people to comprehend it.

And I don't really care because someone else was the one pushing this ridiculous notion that a reserve would be pay protected for premium in the first place! Not my battle or cup of tea anyway.

I have offered a friendly wager that if the pilot actually pushes to test this unlikely situation AND gets pay protected, I will buy a round. But if they lose the pay, they have to buy a round. So far no response?

.
I don’t think it’s a good idea for you two to drink together
Reply
[QUOTE=Standbyzeros;3754334]I don’t think it’s a good idea for you two to drink together[/QUOTE
oooh, I'd buy the drinks
Reply
Quote: oooh, I'd buy the drinks

hahaha...... but I'm offering!
Reply
Well, the final roadshow just ended in MDW. It’s all over now but the voting. See y’all Monday for the postgame.
Reply
Quote: See y’all Monday for the postgame.
Reply

Does APC have a betting pool yet?

90/10

.
Reply
Quote: I don’t think it’s a good idea for you two to drink together
Don't worry, it's not happening.
Reply
12  18  19  20  21  22  23 
Page 22 of 23
Go to