Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Maybe a reson to vote Dem.

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

Tank Commander

Jim "Tank Daddy" Bizzell
Joined
Jun 29, 2004
Posts
240
I didn't know he love pilots so much, and that I made so much money.....


STATEMENT OF SENATOR JOHN McCAIN
CHAIRMAN SENATE COMMITTEE ON
COMMERCE, SCIENCE AND TRANSPORTATION
FULL COMMITTEE HEARING
ON THE STATUS OF LABOR ISSUES IN THE AVIATION INDUSTRY
APRIL 25, 2001


We are all aware of the numerous problems facing the aviation industry.
Congestion, delays, and modernization of air traffic control are all issues
that seem to rise to the forefront to be addressed again and again. This
Committee, industry, the regulatory agencies and others have redoubled their
efforts to address these serious problems.

Recently, however, a new problem has risen, creating further havoc in our
system. While labor negotiations in the airline industry have been ongoing
for years, things have begun to worsen. The trend towards larger airlines
has given unions greater leverage which appears to have contributed to a
mind set that views any work stoppage as legitimate. Normally even
acrimonious labor negotiations are a part of the negotiating process with
both sides using what leverage is available to them to reach the best deal.
However, times have changed; these acrimonious negotiations now adversely
affect the American people.

Let me say from the outset that I have no problem with the right to strike.
Strikes are a legal remedy available under applicable labor statutes.
Recently, however, courts have found more and more that labor unions in the
airline industry have engaged in concerted illegal job actions. These
courts have issued temporary restraining orders and injunctions prohibiting
such actions. In recent months, United, American, Northwest, and Delta have
obtained court ordered relief from these alleged illegal job actions. In
American's case, the court fined American's pilots over $45 million for not
adhering to the injunction.

These actions have affected millions of consumers. Middle America has been
stranded time and time again as a result of this illegal union activity.
According to published reports, last year, United cancelled over 23,000
flights as a result of its pilots' refusal to fly overtime, destroying
carefully planned vacations and business trips. Northwest and Delta
cancelled thousands of flights preemptively over the holiday seasons to
combat alleged mechanic slowdowns and failure to fly overtime by pilots,
respectively. The pilots' sickout at American in 1999 left thousands of
people stranded, some of which have banded together to sue the pilots for
damages.

In this day and age, a job action at a major airline can have a catastrophic
effect on the aviation system and the consumer. The rest of the system
would have a difficult time absorbing the excess passengers and the system
could come to a standstill. While management and labor are affected by
this, both parties have contingencies planned in the event of a job action.
The consumer is the one most affected by this increase in labor actions. It
is family flying across country for their vacation, the daughter coming home
from college, and the son going to visit a sick parent who can not reach
their destinations because the unions have taken matters into their own
hands. In the case of pilots, these are people who, according to industry,
on average make $140,000 while working less than 80 hours a month. At the
same time, according to the most recent data in 1999,the average per capita
income was $21,281.

The last two pilot contract negotiations, United and Delta, both of which
had alleged job actions with far reaching effects on the consumer, resulted
in a pay scale where, by the end of the contract, the senior pilots will
make over $280,000 in base pay with the ability to make one-third more for
voluntarily flying 25 more hours a month. Not only should the consumer not
have to suffer as a result of this avarice, but many analysts are concerned
that with labor costs rising so high, airlines will not be able to survive
economically or will at least put themselves in a hole for years to come.
Labor costs for an airline are now projected to be over 33% of its fixed
costs.

Many people argue that management has a choice, but in reality, the choice
is to give in to higher salary demands that a company may not be able to
afford or face a debilitating strike that may cripple the airline and force
it out of business. I don't believe that anyone would argue that is a
choice.

We have convened this hearing to look at these issues. Although this
subject is one that can be very divisive along party lines, I have received
complaints from both sides of the aisle about the current situation. I
welcome the witnesses today and look forward to a lively and spirited
debate.
icon_smile.gif
 
The next POTUS and four years are going to be critical as air line pilots... The judges appointed and the agenda will determine the final direction this career takes...

From open skies to collective bargaining.....

McCain will destroy the profession
 
What good....

What the hell god is a "profession" when we have to pay 86% taxes to pay for all the crap "curious george" wants to fund?
 
As opposed to asking the chinese fund it and pay the interest on it? I would rather pay higher taxes and get something out of it than have to pay interest on money for years and years!
 
after burner is lit

What the hell god is a "profession" when we have to pay 86% taxes to pay for all the crap "curious george" wants to fund?

No ship. Free college for everyone, Free health care,
Free cheese, milk, xbox, speakers, tv, clothing.

Comrade Nobama is not the answer. None of the three (hillary, mcstain, nobama) will start drilling in anwr and elsewhere. They don't want to lose the 1 million tree hugger votes. Meanwhile we will wait another 10 plus years until gas finally goes over $5 a gallon and then they will drill and say it will take 10 years to make any change at the pump. Al fake gore will keep up flying around in his Gulfstream II while paying for fake carbon credits to feel good about roasting jet A all year round. Twice gore voted down drilling because he is still trying to figure out if he invented the internet.


Who knows why they won't drill for more oil? . Their to worried the spotted owl might lose a few feathers. A quote from McStain from 2001 should not be your deciding factor to vote for liberal nazi germany marxist comrade nobama.

Damn curious magic george will bring this nation to the brink of destruction. Canada may be invaded by North Americans from the lower 48.
 
Drilling in Alaska? Yeah I agree it should be done but your are talking about 600K/Barrel a day...or a drop of p-i-s-s in the ocean. The saudis increased production by 300K/Barrel a day, since may 10Th price are still risings, your talking about pissing against the wind,all you are going to get is getting wet...Try speculation and a weak green back. Obama for me.
 
Last edited:
Don't you just love politics...

What cracks me up is how some like to claim that Obama will raise taxes to some exorbitant amount while at the same time they argue that another four years of a Bush style presidency is just what this country needs.

How about keeping an open mind and listening to the issues? One thing Obama said in an interview that I couldn't agree with more, he's a bottom up kind of economist, as opposed to trickle down. If you give the tax cuts to the middle and lower classes (pilots fit nicely in this group), guess what they're going to do with that money? They're going to go buy more stuff and stimulate the economy. When you give all the breaks to the top income earners, yes, they reinvest some but also shelter, outsource and remove it from the US economy.

Just had to put my $.02 in...
 
Drilling in Alaska? Yeah I agree it should be done but your are talking about 600K/Barrel a day...or a drop of p-i-s-s in the ocean. The saudis increased production by 300K/Barrel a day, since may 10Th price are still risings, your talking about pissing against the wind,all you are going to get is getting wet...Try speculation and a weak green back. Obama for me.

It's not the amount that is in question. It's who controls the amount!
To continue to ignor our own resources puts us a day closer to Armageddon.
 
If you give the tax cuts to the middle and lower classes (pilots fit nicely in this group), guess what they're going to do with that money? They're going to go buy more stuff and stimulate the economy. When you give all the breaks to the top income earners, yes, they reinvest some but also shelter, outsource and remove it from the US economy.

Just had to put my $.02 in...

Nice play on the evil rich thing. Unfortunately the numbers don't really back up what you're saying. The evil tax-sheltering richest 1% pay 37% of the taxes. That percentage has gone up almost 12% in the last decade. Keep going back to them for more, that'll really help things out! As for the bottom brackets, the lowest 80% of income earners pay 26% of the taxes.

So who really is going to 'stimulate' the economy with tax breaks? As for the 'hiding it in a tax shelter', care to back that up or are you just throwing that out there because you really don't know what you're talking about?
 
If you give the tax cuts to the middle and lower classes (pilots fit nicely in this group), guess what they're going to do with that money? They're going to go buy more stuff and stimulate the economy. When you give all the breaks to the top income earners, yes, they reinvest some but also shelter, outsource and remove it from the US economy.

Just had to put my $.02 in...

Oh, and that's not what Obama is going to do anyway, get ready for a tax increase. The Bush cuts expire in the next few years and there is no way Pelosi et al would ever pass up a free tax increase.
 
So you quote an article from prior to 9/11/01 about high pilot salaries. I'm relatively certain he wouldn't say that now.

I'm going to vote for whoever has the guts to chase down terrorists instead of talking them to death. Someone who spent time for our country in a POW camp is the best of the three IMO.

But it is a free country and the right to vote as you please is the best part of it. Just make sure that you do vote when the time comes.
 
So you quote an article from prior to 9/11/01 about high pilot salaries. I'm relatively certain he wouldn't say that now.

I'm going to vote for whoever has the guts to chase down terrorists instead of talking them to death. Someone who spent time for our country in a POW camp is the best of the three IMO.

But it is a free country and the right to vote as you please is the best part of it. Just make sure that you do vote when the time comes.

Instead of "talking them to death"? Diplomacy as an alternative to sending more young troops into fire seems like a great idea to me. If you don't talk and negotiate with your enemies, they'll always be your enemies and you'll be making more in the process. But you don't think like that. You're "shoot first" without realizing the consequences.

And yes, he would say that now. As long as we have pilots making 6 figures and "working less than 80 hours a month" (the moron thinks the actual flight time is the only work we do), he's going to have a chip on his shoulder. And guess whose side he will be on when contracts are up in '09? Yours and mine?

Democrats are labor friendly, moreso than the GOP will ever be. Let's not kid ourselves. I know it's "manly" and "badass" to be a Republican, but let's grow up and look at what's going to help our profession.

I'd rather make more money and pay a slightly higher % of tax than make a lot less under an administration that would quell any sign of a strike when management decides to dock us 20% more. GOP=Management's side, always. It's the Republican way.

If McCain comes in and gives another tax break, he's going to manifest the fact that he already admitted. The economy is not his "strongpoint." His way of saying he doesn't know sh*t about it. Tax break + spending more money we don't have (because of said tax breaks) = even bigger deficit.

I know Republicans hate paying for social programs and keeping the welfare system alive, but that's a small price to pay to keep your profession from tanking. Might have to let that one go.

And you need to drop the fantasy that just because Democrats typically don't have gun-toting, NRA lovefests means they aren't into defending America.
 
Last edited:
Actually I'm pro small government. I also believe in walk softly and carry a big stick. We haven't been walking softly, but that can change.

I don't own a gun, but support the choice of people to do so. Please don't tell me how I think.

I don't trust Hillary (who does?) and Obama is as good a pick as any, I'm just leaning more towards McCain because he seems to be the most straightforward about his views.
 
Obama has my vote.. nothing is going to change that.
 
Dont get me wrong, I hate all the people running in the race. But why should I have to pay for someone else medical insurance when I have to pay my families. why do I have to pay more taxs because of social security, when I want be ale to use it when I get older. I disagree with war and I beleive in talking but talking to Hamas and other terriost org. is not going to work at all. They want us dead plane and simple. you can talk all you want to them they still want you dead. You can give them all the money you want and they will use that money to kill you. Talking doesnt work. Iam a Dem and I hate to say it but i think iam going to have to vote Rep
 
So you quote an article from prior to 9/11/01 about high pilot salaries. I'm relatively certain he wouldn't say that now.

Wanna bet your career on that? McCain hates pilots with a passion. The anti-labor tactics of the past 8 years will pale in comparison to what McCain would bring to the country. If McCain gets elected, I'm thinking of going the whole international contract pilot route for my career. I just don't see us surviving as a profession in this country if McCain gets into office.
 
Oh, and that's not what Obama is going to do anyway, get ready for a tax increase. The Bush cuts expire in the next few years and there is no way Pelosi et al would ever pass up a free tax increase.

The Dems only want to let the tax cuts expire on the top brackets. Anyone making less than $250k a year will keep their current tax rates, and those making in the lower end will actually get more tax breaks. The tax increase fear-mongering from the right is unsubstantiated.
 
Nice play on the evil rich thing. Unfortunately the numbers don't really back up what you're saying. The evil tax-sheltering richest 1% pay 37% of the taxes. That percentage has gone up almost 12% in the last decade. Keep going back to them for more, that'll really help things out! As for the bottom brackets, the lowest 80% of income earners pay 26% of the taxes.

Why don't you tell the rest of the story? The richest 1% (really, the richest 10-20%) deserve to pay a disproportionate amount of taxes. Even now they're grossly under-taxed because we don't tax their wealth--only their income. And they own a grossly disproportionate amount of the nation's wealth.

The Distribution of Wealth and Income

The distribution of wealth is much more unequal than the distribution of income, especially when focussing on the bottom 60% of all households. The bottom 60% of households possess only 4% of the nation's wealth while it earns 26.8% of all income.





Can you think of any reason for the much greater inequality in wealth than in income?
What do we tax more in the US: wealth (assets) or income?
Think of all kinds of "income" taxes that exist -- federal, state, and (in some cases) local. Think of the very few kinds of assets that are taxed: property taxes, in some states taxes on the value of cars. If you own considerable assets do you have a reason to keep them in forms that will not be taxed?


Which is a Better Measure of Societal Inequality: Wealth or Income?


Looking at the distribution of wealth and looking at the distribution of income gives the researcher two quite different views of the amount of inequality in American society. Which economic measure -- wealth or income -- should be emphasized?

Alan Greenspan, chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank, make the case for wealth:
"Ultimately, we are interested in the question of relative standards of living and economic well-being. We need to examine trends in the distribution of wealth, which, more fundamentally than earnings or income, represents a measure of the ability of households to consume."
Those who argue for the greater importance of income make the case that for wealth to actually have a significant impact on one's standard of living it has to be translated into higher income.



*For those interested in reading a very good study of wealth distribution in the US, please see Edward N. Wolff's "Recent Trends in Household Wealth in the United States: Rising Debt and the Middle-Class Squeeze," June, 2007.
 
... I beleive in talking but talking to Hamas and other terriost org. is not going to work at all. They want us dead plane and simple.

And this, Ladies and Gentleman is why the US and our foreign policy is broken.. here we have the typical American who doesn't seem to know the difference between Hamas and Al Queda for example.. to him, they're all just radical islamic rag heads that "want to kill us" to borrow from GW's playbook.. Nevermind that Hamas has never done anything against the US, and only has a bone to pick with Israel.. but God forbid we actually let Israel stand on their own Nuclear powered feet for once and resolve the mess their creation has made.. God forbid we actually ask them to withdraw from the illegal settlements that pepper what is supposed to be Palestine (even as recognized by the post-1967 borders).. God forbid we talk to "terrorists" Afterall, if Israel calls them Terrorists, they surely must be.. Right?

After all instability in the Middle East means at leas a $20-30/barrel risk premium for Exxon Mobil to tack on to their bottom line ;)

Obama 2008!

(former Republican turned Independent for Obama)
 
I'm all for diplomacy with Hamas, but I also stand by Israel. Compromise is welcome, but telling the Israelis "hey, you're on your own now" isn't right. They are a great ally, and I'd like it to stay that way. But yes, we should be having diplomatic talks with Hamas along with just about everyone else. This whole Bush admin nonsense of "it gives them credibility if we talk to the terrahists" isn't getting us anywhere.
 
I'm all for diplomacy with Hamas, but I also stand by Israel. Compromise is welcome, but telling the Israelis "hey, you're on your own now" isn't right. They are a great ally, and I'd like it to stay that way. But yes, we should be having diplomatic talks with Hamas along with just about everyone else. This whole Bush admin nonsense of "it gives them credibility if we talk to the terrahists" isn't getting us anywhere.

We're allies with a lot of countries, but only Israel has carte blanche with what ever they decide to do, and with the way they treat the Palestinians .. When the South Africans did what they did, we didn't waste time ending it, but for what ever reason, we dare not tell Israel to make any compromises. Our unilateral support of everything they do is at at the root of why "They hate us"
 
A textbook example of insanity is to continue with the same reactions to an event and expect a different outcome. A vote for McCain is a vote for a continuation of the past 8 years of economic, social, energy and foreign policy.......AND expecting a better outcome: In my book that thinking is insane. A vote for McCain is insane.

Bush economic plan: ignore the problems, print more money and drop interest rates and destroy the dollar; McCain "we've done pretty good under the Bush economy"

We need to fix healthcare, immigration, get a realistic energy policy AND we need to have a foreign policy that includes diplomacy instead of fear mongering. How much you wanna bet that 1-2 weeks before the election the Bushies will raise the threat level?

We need a fresh face in DC., someone from OUTSIDE the beltway crowd who will resume politics as ususal, remaining polarizing and alienate the other side of the isle. Clinton is all but history and McCain is a continuation of past failed policies. Obama all the way.

And for those of you Rush/Beck republicans who think it's cute to indirectly refer to Obama as "curious george" you are all racist bigots...GROW UP! If if P!sses you off to be called out on this, then perhaps you need to look in the mirror and honestly ask yourself is this 2008 or 1958? There is ZERO room for this kind of racism.

Proud to be a registered Democrat.
 
coonass,

i have some news for you my friend...you already pay for other peoples medical insurance. Someone has to pay for people with no insurance that walk into a hospital sick. They cant turn that person away, so who pays for it? You and I, in the form of higher premiums. Now, if everyone has basic insurance, it will actually be cheaper, because the person who did not have insurance before will go to doctor before they become life-threating ill. We will go from treating an advanced stage of illness that costs much more to being more preventative in our medical care. This will cost much less over the long run.....please rethink your aversion to a national health care system. It would have many flaws, but cost over the long run is not one of them, if done properly. However, our current system has many flaws as well, in addition to being expensive and inefficient!
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom