Spirit of NKS
03-16-2013, 05:51 AM
#5471
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: Switch, Lever & Light Specialist
Posts: 1,065
Originally Posted by Normann
Because we have line bidding, volunteering is helpful during transition and anytime there is a higher need for reserves i.e. holidays and weekends or during the summer, etc.
With line bidding they need to carry a significant amount of extra reserves to cover the transition. It has gotten worse with the new contract. Later in the month that extra coverage is not useful so they rather not have it. This was a problem with the old contract as well. You may only have 83.3 block hours per months on average but if you are putting out fires for scheduling, on a short notice, all the time, you practically became a rolling reserve coverage all year long. You get a pay protected drop during a day where coverage is higher, and get 200% for your pick up. Great! But you are basically always on call. Just think. It is like having a 30 day reserve line. In essence, you are doing almost 2 reserve's job all by yourself. (More like 1.8.) If you have 10% of the peeps doing this, you can run the company with little reserve coverage and never cancel. And they did.
Obviously seven planes went back in 2008. I am not saying everyone's job could have been saved. But the company did overdue the furlough big time. Then Monohan was trying to get some brownie points by running the company with minimum levels even though the company paid top dollar for all those 200-300% trips.
So the "I can block only this much" argument is completely meaningless with line bidding.
With line bidding they need to carry a significant amount of extra reserves to cover the transition. It has gotten worse with the new contract. Later in the month that extra coverage is not useful so they rather not have it. This was a problem with the old contract as well. You may only have 83.3 block hours per months on average but if you are putting out fires for scheduling, on a short notice, all the time, you practically became a rolling reserve coverage all year long. You get a pay protected drop during a day where coverage is higher, and get 200% for your pick up. Great! But you are basically always on call. Just think. It is like having a 30 day reserve line. In essence, you are doing almost 2 reserve's job all by yourself. (More like 1.8.) If you have 10% of the peeps doing this, you can run the company with little reserve coverage and never cancel. And they did.
Obviously seven planes went back in 2008. I am not saying everyone's job could have been saved. But the company did overdue the furlough big time. Then Monohan was trying to get some brownie points by running the company with minimum levels even though the company paid top dollar for all those 200-300% trips.
So the "I can block only this much" argument is completely meaningless with line bidding.
03-16-2013, 05:54 AM
#5472
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: Switch, Lever & Light Specialist
Posts: 1,065
Originally Posted by Lemonade
ok, thanks for the response. Let me continue to understand....if no ones job could have been saved and the company was punished by paying double or triple and the contract doesn't prevent someone from living like a corporate pilot then why are you angry with them? The pilots didnt control the number of furloughs. My sincere sympathies for your loss while on furlough.
I'm just trying to understand this place.
I'm just trying to understand this place.
Pick up when we're fully staffed. The second a pilot is on the street, any open time pickups should stop. And, a list of guys picking up time while there's furloughs should be kept. These people are not union pilots, they're lower than whale dung!
03-16-2013, 06:08 AM
#5473
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2012
Position: A 320
Posts: 265
Originally Posted by Cruise
Anyone that picks up open time while guys/ gals are on the street is tantamount to a scumbag. They're working the trips that should be covered by a furloughed pilot.
Pick up when we're fully staffed. The second a pilot is on the street, any open time pickups should stop. And, a list of guys picking up time while there's furloughs should be kept. These people are not union pilots, they're lower than whale dung!
Pick up when we're fully staffed. The second a pilot is on the street, any open time pickups should stop. And, a list of guys picking up time while there's furloughs should be kept. These people are not union pilots, they're lower than whale dung!
What is your position on that same pilot blocking 72 hrs but crediting 150 hrs?
03-16-2013, 06:56 AM
#5474
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Posts: 758
Originally Posted by Normann
You can't be serious. You called me out to show you some data. Your post #5453. I was having a conversation with NedsKid when you chimed in.
You can expect me to continue to chime in on topics in which I have some interest/information, especially if I might be implicated by someones misinformation. That's the price I pay for allowing my ID to become known!
Maybe you'd rather everyone be totally anonymous?
03-16-2013, 08:50 AM
#5475
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: 320*****
Posts: 487
Originally Posted by skybolt
This forum includes of 41277 members according to the stats at the bottom of the page. Sorry I busted into your private conversation. If you don't want a public conversation, then use the PM system.
You can expect me to continue to chime in on topics in which I have some interest/information, especially if I might be implicated by someones misinformation. That's the price I pay for allowing my ID to become known!
Maybe you'd rather everyone be totally anonymous?
You can expect me to continue to chime in on topics in which I have some interest/information, especially if I might be implicated by someones misinformation. That's the price I pay for allowing my ID to become known!
Maybe you'd rather everyone be totally anonymous?
This is always the problem with you. You can't ever respond to the argument with a simple counter argument. What you do instead, you decide to flea and abandon the thread. Then later you turn the whole thing upside down and try to back out of it. The last two pages of this thread is the classic example of it. It is impossible to argue with you. I hate doing it. Unless you call me out I usually don't even respond when I see your post.
So let us sum it up:
1. I post something that is not directed at you, to a different member.
2. You involve yourself and ask me to provide data. Nothing wrong with that.
3. I provide the data. Certainly from here on the conversation is with you. But it wasn't originally aimed at you.
4. Next you decide to take the high road and not respond on this public forum. Never mind that since then you had like 5 posts already.
5. Ok. Fine. I tell you I don't even understand why you even got involved in the thread the first place. I did not have you on my mind when I wrote what I did.
6. Then you come back and tell me I quoted you so it was aimed at you. Yeah, from step 2 and on it was. Geeeezz... really?
7. Finally you write, you have the right to quote me and if I don't want to be on a public forum than use PM. What makes you think that I don't want to be on this forum? That was your line not mine.
Saturday night live has got nothing on you as far as entertainment value.
I really do not want to be mean to you and tell you what I really think about folks that argue in a fashion like that above. So I won't. Thank you for your past service! I know you have tried what was best in your opinion. I also have to say that I am nobody in the union. I am just a single vote but you will never have this vote unless you can show me reason, and clear arguments.
All the key people (former or current MEC) are able to argue and reason with me. Very often I find myself being wrong and have to yield to them because they have great reasons, examples, and over time they seems to be right. Guys like that have my vote. Nothing personal. It must be pure coincidence that those same guys are a ton of fun to fly with while the hard core opposition pops into open time all the time. Pure coincidence I am telling you.
03-16-2013, 08:55 AM
#5476
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: 320*****
Posts: 487
Originally Posted by Lemonade
ok, thanks for the response. Let me continue to understand....if no ones job could have been saved and the company was punished by paying double or triple and the contract doesn't prevent someone from living like a corporate pilot then why are you angry with them? The pilots didnt control the number of furloughs. My sincere sympathies for your loss while on furlough.
I'm just trying to understand this place.
I'm just trying to understand this place.
Originally Posted by Lemonade
"if no ones job could have been saved"
03-16-2013, 10:02 AM
#5477
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Posts: 758
Originally Posted by Normann
How do you come up with this stuff? I feel like having a conversation with George Lucas about his next science fiction movie. It was you who did not want the public conversation not me. That is how you decided to get out of it! Don't tell me that something was aimed at you when you were not even part of the conversation initially.
This is always the problem with you. You can't ever respond to the argument with a simple counter argument. What you do instead, you decide to flea and abandon the thread. Then later you turn the whole thing upside down and try to back out of it. The last two pages of this thread is the classic example of it. It is impossible to argue with you. I hate doing it. Unless you call me out I usually don't even respond when I see your post.
So let us sum it up:
1. I post something that is not directed at you, to a different member.
2. You involve yourself and ask me to provide data. Nothing wrong with that.
3. I provide the data. Certainly from here on the conversation is with you. But it wasn't originally aimed at you.
4. Next you decide to take the high road and not respond on this public forum. Never mind that since then you had like 5 posts already.
5. Ok. Fine. I tell you I don't even understand why you even got involved in the thread the first place. I did not have you on my mind when I wrote what I did.
6. Then you come back and tell me I quoted you so it was aimed at you. Yeah, from step 2 and on it was. Geeeezz... really?
7. Finally you write, you have the right to quote me and if I don't want to be on a public forum than use PM. What makes you think that I don't want to be on this forum? That was your line not mine.
Saturday night live has got nothing on you as far as entertainment value.
I really do not want to be mean to you and tell you what I really think about folks that argue in a fashion like that above. So I won't. Thank you for your past service! I know you have tried what was best in your opinion. I also have to say that I am nobody in the union. I am just a single vote but you will never have this vote unless you can show me reason, and clear arguments.
All the key people (former or current MEC) are able to argue and reason with me. Very often I find myself being wrong and have to yield to them because they have great reasons, examples, and over time they seems to be right. Guys like that have my vote. Nothing personal. It must be pure coincidence that those same guys are a ton of fun to fly with while the hard core opposition pops into open time all the time. Pure coincidence I am telling you.
This is always the problem with you. You can't ever respond to the argument with a simple counter argument. What you do instead, you decide to flea and abandon the thread. Then later you turn the whole thing upside down and try to back out of it. The last two pages of this thread is the classic example of it. It is impossible to argue with you. I hate doing it. Unless you call me out I usually don't even respond when I see your post.
So let us sum it up:
1. I post something that is not directed at you, to a different member.
2. You involve yourself and ask me to provide data. Nothing wrong with that.
3. I provide the data. Certainly from here on the conversation is with you. But it wasn't originally aimed at you.
4. Next you decide to take the high road and not respond on this public forum. Never mind that since then you had like 5 posts already.
5. Ok. Fine. I tell you I don't even understand why you even got involved in the thread the first place. I did not have you on my mind when I wrote what I did.
6. Then you come back and tell me I quoted you so it was aimed at you. Yeah, from step 2 and on it was. Geeeezz... really?
7. Finally you write, you have the right to quote me and if I don't want to be on a public forum than use PM. What makes you think that I don't want to be on this forum? That was your line not mine.
Saturday night live has got nothing on you as far as entertainment value.
I really do not want to be mean to you and tell you what I really think about folks that argue in a fashion like that above. So I won't. Thank you for your past service! I know you have tried what was best in your opinion. I also have to say that I am nobody in the union. I am just a single vote but you will never have this vote unless you can show me reason, and clear arguments.
All the key people (former or current MEC) are able to argue and reason with me. Very often I find myself being wrong and have to yield to them because they have great reasons, examples, and over time they seems to be right. Guys like that have my vote. Nothing personal. It must be pure coincidence that those same guys are a ton of fun to fly with while the hard core opposition pops into open time all the time. Pure coincidence I am telling you.
When it is implied that I am dishonest, I'm happy to defend myself.......up to the point that my defense involves showing something negative about a person not in this discussion. Most of what you want to discuss eventually ends up in "he said, she said" and I see no reason entering into that discussion.
I don't really see any argument on your part. You've made claims about certain unnamed spirit pilots. Making claims is not an argument, sorry.
Speaking of sorry. I'm sorry you got furloughed. Spirit did furlough too deeply when they did so, no question.
I'm not backing out of anything. See my response to shift work. When you present facts vs perceptions, then I'll respond in kind. If I'm wrong I'll admit it.
Go ahead and tell us what you think of people who argue like I do. You're anonymous, no one will be able to retaliate.
You know who I am. Yet you hide behind anonymity and then deride my style of argument. Nice.
Regarding your last comment about "hard core opposition", your anecdotal evidence proves absolutely nothing. It doesn't prove that no one wants to fly with Mr or Mrs "200 credit hours", although it might prove that his/her schedule constantly changes as he/she trades/drops/manipulates his/her schedule. Try arguing something besides your perceptions next time.
03-16-2013, 11:36 AM
#5478
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: Switch, Lever & Light Specialist
Posts: 1,065
Originally Posted by Lemonade
Ok so if someone is awarded a 72 hr line but they end up blocking 83.3 hrs while someone is on furlough then they are a scumbag, non-unionist and whale dung?
What is your position on that same pilot blocking 72 hrs but crediting 150 hrs?
What is your position on that same pilot blocking 72 hrs but crediting 150 hrs?
We're not talking about credit hours, there are tons of ways to earn credit and most of which are legitimate even if there are pilots on furlough. But if someone picks up flying out of open time (not talking about advertised trips from someone else)....open time, where scheduling is looking to fill a trip, should never be picked up when there are furloughees.
03-16-2013, 11:38 AM
#5479
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: 320*****
Posts: 487
Originally Posted by skybolt
Let's get something straight. I'll be happy to argue issues and history. I won't get into a ****ing contest about honesty/dishonest when that discussion involves persons not able to defend themselves.
When it is implied that I am dishonest, I'm happy to defend myself.......up to the point that my defense involves showing something negative about a person not in this discussion. Most of what you want to discuss eventually ends up in "he said, she said" and I see no reason entering into that discussion.
I don't really see any argument on your part. You've made claims about certain unnamed spirit pilots. Making claims is not an argument, sorry.
Speaking of sorry. I'm sorry you got furloughed. Spirit did furlough too deeply when they did so, no question.
I'm not backing out of anything. See my response to shift work. When you present facts vs perceptions, then I'll respond in kind. If I'm wrong I'll admit it.
Go ahead and tell us what you think of people who argue like I do. You're anonymous, no one will be able to retaliate.
You know who I am. Yet you hide behind anonymity and then deride my style of argument. Nice.
Regarding your last comment about "hard core opposition", your anecdotal evidence proves absolutely nothing. It doesn't prove that no one wants to fly with Mr or Mrs "200 credit hours", although it might prove that his/her schedule constantly changes as he/she trades/drops/manipulates his/her schedule. Try arguing something besides your perceptions next time.
When it is implied that I am dishonest, I'm happy to defend myself.......up to the point that my defense involves showing something negative about a person not in this discussion. Most of what you want to discuss eventually ends up in "he said, she said" and I see no reason entering into that discussion.
I don't really see any argument on your part. You've made claims about certain unnamed spirit pilots. Making claims is not an argument, sorry.
Speaking of sorry. I'm sorry you got furloughed. Spirit did furlough too deeply when they did so, no question.
I'm not backing out of anything. See my response to shift work. When you present facts vs perceptions, then I'll respond in kind. If I'm wrong I'll admit it.
Go ahead and tell us what you think of people who argue like I do. You're anonymous, no one will be able to retaliate.
You know who I am. Yet you hide behind anonymity and then deride my style of argument. Nice.
Regarding your last comment about "hard core opposition", your anecdotal evidence proves absolutely nothing. It doesn't prove that no one wants to fly with Mr or Mrs "200 credit hours", although it might prove that his/her schedule constantly changes as he/she trades/drops/manipulates his/her schedule. Try arguing something besides your perceptions next time.
You jump the guy that labels the opposition something bad. But you don't mind the opposition labeling the leadership something bad. Never mind it is done every day over the other board (which you are frequenting a lot). Interestingly you never ask them for a proof. Perhaps you missed all those comments that make up about 75% of the web-board. But this is also happening in the cockpit, the crew room, etc. You see I have a problem with that. It is not helping us as a union.
You want proof? What do you want me to do? Start paste/copying stuff or carry a recorder with me? I don't need to prove a thing. The behavior is present and self evident. And that behavior is dishonest. I stand by that.
This is certainly pointless though. Bye bye Skybolt!
If someone else wants to chime in I will respond. For now I am off to my St. Patrick's Day party.
03-16-2013, 11:48 AM
#5480
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2012
Posts: 193
Skybolt dont you realize they are just screwing with you. Anyone that disagrees with the MEC is an enemy of the people. I thought everyone knew that. Geez
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
