I'd ignore these tools. The funny thing is that very few pilots will defend the actions of Pierce on the UAL/CAL pilot forum -- maybe because they aren't anonymous there.:rolleyes:

I'll take your advise - Thanks!

How precious, lol - advise from Maverick, advise from Maverick.

Really? That's all you got? That's the best you can do? You
Sound like that guy who defended pierce, his mini-me. No substance whatsoever.

This is the kind of (c)apt that will get a real eye opening when he is crewed with L-UAL f/o's. He thinks the opinions in this thread aren't mainstream... He might as well set a weekly appointment with the flight office so he can complain about the mean L-UAL pilots.

You're wasting your time and effort -- you're 'clever' quips have zero effect on me.

Actually, WRT the sentence in bold above, none of my posts in this thread mention JP. I stated my opposition to doing anything to help this company right now. Your replies in this thread have been full of deflection, name calling and castigating others for "lacking maturity" while you display that very thing. And you fancy yourself as quite a wit. (lol)

You won't say whether you scabbed or not. Fine, no biggy. Your opinions certainly fit the mold. Continue with your regularly scheduled appointments to lick the sweat off Smisek's scrot.

For the LCAL guys, I would have said the same things to Block had he been LUAL. And asked the same questions as we have our share of scabs and other bootlickers. If they haven't gotten it by now, they never will.

I agree that while we might not like the way JP is operating lately, whether he stays or goes is completely up to the LCAL pilots. But I would like to know the answer to a question that Old Mako asked in the 2nd post to this thread:

"I'll ask again, how does pierce go from CAL to orenstein/Mesa and then BACK to CAL, reclaim his seniority number, and then GET ELECTED to MC??"

Simple, Company Quid Pro Quo. Plus, I'm quite sure there is an office waiting for him someday.

How did pierce react to your(UA) SOC training? "We see no problems"
or something like that? Really? That's a unity statement? If pierce really didn't have issues on his side then how about a statement to the effect:
"Well, our SOC training is much less involved since we are not taking the brunt of the changes. I could very well understand how the UA pilots would feel the need to have sim time to feel adequately trained. I imagine we would say the same things if we were in their situation. " There is absolutely no excuse for not backing the UA pilots. If fact, his statements were their detriment. If he said nothing it would have been better.

pierce's lack of backing should tell both sides where his is bread is buttered.... now, who was it that gave him his seniority number back?

Seriously block, do you not see the conflict of interest this poses??


EDIT- Saw this on the Kravit thread after I posted. Thought I would re-post it..much better detail.

"I understand that in 99% of the cases where the UALMEC had issues with safety, such as fixed base simulators, doing wing ice checks, and numerous others, Pierce told the UALMEC to bug off. He would not take a stand with them. On almost every issue Pierce took exactly the same position as management. The UALMEC found that odd. This was the case in examples that were purely financially driven, such as the FBS matter. There is no logical explanation for this. A union is supposed to act as a safety advocate, not a mouthpiece for the company. Ideally the two sides will stake out their positions and meet in the middle. With Pierce acting as an advocate for management's positions it became 2 against 1. CAL Management & CALMEC (Pierce/Marotta) versus the UALMEC

Pierce told the MEC that he did not have any issues with the way that his pilots were being trained. Based on all of this and more, the UALMEC lost confidence and trust in Pierce and desired to maintain strict operational security on the lawsuit. The fact is that the UALMEC didn't include Pierce due to a long history of his saying that he'd help and then bailing. There were also concerns over information being leaked to the company from Pierce's team.

It would be inappropriate and inaccurate to base judgement on the UALMEC's actions for filing and engaging in the lawsuit without Pierce. This was an event at the end of a long series of events in which Pierce made it clear he was interested in going it alone through his actions.

Pierce further confirmed the UALMEC's suspicions when in court the company's attorney made the statement that the CALMEC made it clear to them that they had no problems with the training, and that the CAL pilots do not stand with the United pilots on the matters of safety/training issues."

Idealist, but it's getting harder--$50 ontime checked deposited again today.

I am amazed how much credibility is being give to Kravit's comments on the internet. I don't know anything about Pierce, or the CAL MEC. I can tell you this: Kravit has zero credibility. He is the bottom 1%, OF THE BOTTOM 1%, of all pilots. How he got on the MEC, *** knows.

I used to fly with Kravit when he was a Capt in MIA. He was, and is, a complete wack-job. Loose cannon. Whatever term you want to use. Credible is NOT the term you want to use, or quote him in any fashion, as part of an argument.

Probably both sides were to blame in all of this PS debacle. And Kravit is just a side show all of his own.