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

1261 days to go!

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
Register   Log in
livin'thesim said:
Flopgut - best not to use trigger words around people who are overly sensitive. They see offense in everything.
Click to expand...

Not overly sensitive at all--just tired of the sort of stuff that is obviously intended as offense. You know like your crap. Tell you what, Sim... if you stop posting anti-SWA stuff that is obviously inflammatory lies, then people will probably stop making posts pointing out that you're an inflammatory liar. Deal?

Bubba
 
Flopgut said:
I don't really have to wonder what our FOs would think about an incremental bump to top FO pay (in place of retirement progression), because I was an FO then. I think it makes a mockery of what we all do this job for. And keep in mind, top FO job is a vastly different thing here than SWA. Widebody FO can fly or IRO and the QOL of those schedules are incredible. Your FOs ride along and play fartcatcher to a bunch of cake eaters who gamed retirement age. I can't imagine how bad that would suck!!

I think it's a good thing that swapa is making retirement an important issue and not trying to raise the age again. I hope it works and I think you'll find that even a seemingly small number of immediate retirements makes a big difference.
Click to expand...

This is what I was talking about, Flop.

You seem to think that Southwest was some sort of leader in getting the age limit raised, conspiring against you and the rest of the industry. The fact of the matter is, that most unions and companies were officially in favor of it. SWAPA took a survey of its members, and they voted 52-48% in favor of raising the age limit. Therefore, SWAPA's official position was in favor. ALPA's official position (as was APA's, by the way) was the same. At least one person on FI has posted that ALPA's survey showed a slight majority of pilots opposed to raising it, but ALPA National made its position in favor regardless. I don't know if that part is true or not (I'm not privy to ALPA's records, and it could just be the bitching of a individual mad pilot), but officially, ALPA had the same official stance as SWAPA.

The bottom line is that industry-wide, the results were the same. The unions were all officially in favor of raising the age limit, while pilots were generally split down the middle, presumably with a slight advantage to the ones who were in favor. Trust me, there's just as many pilots at Southwest as there were at Continental, who were unhappy with the result. But you seem to think that we were all in favor (your bolded comment above makes it clear that you think that, despite the facts). Trust me, we were not.

Bubba
 
Actually, that wasn't really ALPA's official position (although it was Prater's unofficial position). The official position was that ALPA was opposed to the age change, but "if the age change was inevitable," ALPA was authorized to support the legislation in order to get changes made to it to make the age change less onerous.

I'll agree with you that ALPA was largely to blame for the ultimate result, because ALPA was always the big road block to changing it. Prater coming in and not supporting the old policy was fatal to the Age 60 rule. But you should also be honest and admit that SWAPA was always out in front on supporting the age change, and APAAD's leaders were SWAPA pilots.
 
SWA Bubba said:
Not overly sensitive at all--just tired of the sort of stuff that is obviously intended as offense. You know like your crap. Tell you what, Sim... if you stop posting anti-SWA stuff that is obviously inflammatory lies, then people will probably stop making posts pointing out that you're an inflammatory liar. Deal?

Bubba
Click to expand...


Listen, you emotionally incontinent little sissy:

Go see if I have a history of dogging on SWA. I don't.

That is your own incredible oversensitivity talking. Try not to post when your hands are quaking with rage.

M-kay?
 
Flopgut said:
And btw why is the collective SWA ego so frail? I don't bash SWA on all things. I'm not posting on the SWA meltdown thread, nor will I (even though that leprechaun Tankerhead calls me out) I don't take any pleasure in reading that sort of thing. I don't like age 65 and I don't like SWA airport BS.
Click to expand...

You are one funky monkey. I just browsed the aforementioned thread and found nothing of the sort. I'd stay and expound on how crazy you are, but one of my green felt suits needs to be picked up from the cleaners.
 
Speaking of crazy, am I losing it or was there a W-2 thread in the majors section a few days ago?

Never mind, found it in GA, along with some other threads I could've sworn were here. Kooky...
 
Last edited:
livin'thesim said:
Listen, you emotionally incontinent little sissy:

Go see if I have a history of dogging on SWA. I don't.

That is your own incredible oversensitivity talking. Try not to post when your hands are quaking with rage.

M-kay?
Click to expand...

Listen, you comprehension-challenged wanker:

Go see if this is all really about your "history" or not. You made a slamming post containing a bunch of complete bullsh!t about Southwest pilots, punctuated with a fairy tale that was unbelievable to even the most ardent of SWA-haters. I called you on it, and so far, your continued and only defense has been that you "don't have a history of dogging SWA." Well, now you do have a history of "dogging SWA," and with some of the stupidest and unbelievable crap that anyone has yet to come up with.

This is your own incredible stupidity-followed-by-backpedaling talking. Try not to post when your hands are shaking with the palsy of senility or ignorance. (Of course, that may limit you excessively).

We good now?

Bubba
 
Last edited:
tankerhead said:
You are one funky monkey. I just browsed the aforementioned thread and found nothing of the sort. I'd stay and expound on how crazy you are, but one of my green felt suits needs to be picked up from the cleaners.
Click to expand...


My bad, it was a different SWA thread. Keep your sheleighleigh handy.
 
SWA Bubba said:
Listen, you comprehension-challenged wanker:

Go see if this is all really about your "history" or not. You made a slamming post containing a bunch of complete bullsh!t about Southwest pilots, punctuated with a fairy tale that was unbelievable to even the most ardent of SWA-haters. I called you on it, and so far, your continued and only defense has been that you "don't have a history of dogging SWA." Well, now you do have a history of "dogging SWA," and with some of the stupidest and unbelievable crap that anyone has yet to come up with.

This is your own incredible stupidity-followed-by-backpedaling talking. Try not to post when your hands are shaking with the palsy of senility or ignorance. (Of course, that may limit you excessively).

We good now?

Bubba
Click to expand...


It's so easy to play you like a fiddle. If you think I'm backpedaling, you're wrong. I fully stand behind my statements.

And stop being an angry little sissy-boy. Makes pro pilots look bad.

Hahaha Lololol.
 
Flopgut said:
My bad, it was a different SWA thread. Keep your sheleighleigh handy.
Click to expand...

No prob. Plus I just learned a new word (spelled shillelagh) , courtesy of you and Wikipedia. To return the favor, I'll have you know I'm dyeing my merkin green once I'm done posting this. (Make sure you actually click the wiki link; don't just read the Google narrative) :puke:
 
Heard a flight of four UH-60s in the Persian Gulf yesterday. Call sign: Merkin 56 flight. ?
 
flyboyike said:
Common sense prevails, and in Federal Court, no less.
Click to expand...

Indeed!! Interesting news and likely to have some far reaching effects. I think FAR 91K will have a retirement age max pretty soon, and that will pbly spill over else where.

It's too bad the greed imperative took over this profession. Leaving 121 early at 60 and then flying 91 to age 70+ will be over for everyone. The weak pilots thought they deserved what the sharp ones were getting. Soon it will be over.
 
Flopgut said:
Indeed!! Interesting news and likely to have some far reaching effects. I think FAR 91K will have a retirement age max pretty soon, and that will pbly spill over else where.

It's too bad the greed imperative took over this profession. Leaving 121 early at 60 and then flying 91 to age 70+ will be over for everyone. The weak pilots thought they deserved what the sharp ones were getting. Soon it will be over.
Click to expand...

I don't see Congress or anybody at the FAA clamoring for extending the rule to 91K/135 so don't hold your breath.

The Fed missed their chance when they extended the age to 65. The trade-off for pushing the age to 65 should have been applying it to ALL compensated flying. There was no demand for it then. There won't be any demand for it now even with this court ruling (which actually first came out in May).
 

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest resources

Latest media

Carbon Cub FX-3 Shenandoah Valley
Carbon Cub at Kittyhawk
FX-3 in the backcountry
IFR Panel in a Carbon Cub FX-3
Cub-Provo-UT-c.jpg
Back
Top