Flex Jet read file

[doh]

I'm sorry, you're right - it's my fault, because what was being negotiated at the table was all available to me in real time, and the union members were paying my salary so I could concentrate full-time on those issues instead of fly airplanes. Oh wait, that was the negotiating committee, not me.

I think you are (deliberately?) missing his point. Since the pilots are the union, you are welcome to suggest what needs to be negotiated. If they missed, or lacked the negotiating capital to include an item, you could have suggested it. No agreement is perfect, including the agreement management unilaterally implements.

 

[BlueNose]

I think you are (deliberately?) missing his point. Since the pilots are the union, you are welcome to suggest what needs to be negotiated. If they missed, or lacked the negotiating capital to include an item, you could have suggested it. No agreement is perfect, including the agreement management unilaterally implements.

I get his point, and yours, just don't agree. My point is simply that those entrusted with (and paid for) leadership positions should be accountable for their performance. What do you think the odds are that the same group of IBT negotiators will be at the table next time around? Seems accountability is as popular with 1108's leaders as it is with the company's.


And now the emphasis seems to be on pushing Flex pilots into unionizing to protect themselves when the lists merge. I don't believe the lists will ever be merged, because KR will keep the companies separate, building Flex and letting the Options pilot group continue to wither. What is 1108 doing to help their current members? When Options has 200 pilots and 45 planes left, and all the rest is flown by Flexjet pilots as 'brand partners,' maybe you'll see it. And this scope clause is what lets it happen. I only hope I'm wrong.

 

[DirtyBeech]

If you don't think the lists will be merged, and right soon for that matter, then you're not paying attention. They're not even bothering with the pretense of separate companies anymore.

 

[BlueNose]

If you don't think the lists will be merged, and right soon for that matter, then you're not paying attention. They're not even bothering with the pretense of separate companies anymore.

There are a number of barriers to merging the lists, the requirement to deal with a union that KR loathes not least among them. There are almost no barriers to effectively combining the operations by selling charter between them, while only keeping the pretense of separate companies. Using one of his other companies to cannibilize business (and cash flow) from Options is nothing new for him, even to the point of transferring a large part of the employment over - he's already done it to FO's maintenance dept with Constant Aviation.

That's the model I see playing out. DAC has investment partners in Options. Transferring a dollar from Options to a wholly-owned 'partner' is like taking 60 cents out of your left pocket (along w/ 40 c of your partners' money), and putting a buck in your right. And for Kenn, sticking it to the union is whipped cream and a cherry on top.

 

[doh]

I get his point, and yours, just don't agree. My point is simply that those entrusted with (and paid for) leadership positions should be accountable for their performance. What do you think the odds are that the same group of IBT negotiators will be at the table next time around? Seems accountability is as popular with 1108's leaders as it is with the company's.


And now the emphasis seems to be on pushing Flex pilots into unionizing to protect themselves when the lists merge. I don't believe the lists will ever be merged, because KR will keep the companies separate, building Flex and letting the Options pilot group continue to wither. What is 1108 doing to help their current members? When Options has 200 pilots and 45 planes left, and all the rest is flown by Flexjet pilots as 'brand partners,' maybe you'll see it. And this scope clause is what lets it happen. I only hope I'm wrong.

Kind of like those responsible for the financial crisis should be held accountable? Oh wait, no, those were management types. No need to hold them accountable. Just demand a higher standard from the guys who try and hold management accountable. If management Fs up, bail 'em out...

 

[BlueNose]

Kind of like those responsible for the financial crisis should be held accountable? Oh wait, no, those were management types. No need to hold them accountable. Just demand a higher standard from the guys who try and hold management accountable. If management Fs up, bail 'em out...

I, for one, would have cheered to see Lloyd Blankfein, Hank Greenberg, Angelo Mozilo and their cronies doing the perp walk, and let wall street crash and recover all on its own. But because they didn't, because their corrupt political buddies on both sides saved them, everyone in leadership everywhere should be able to claim a pass? That's your parable? Didn't your mother ever tell you that two wrongs don't make a right?

 

[luckydog]

If you don't think the lists will be merged, and right soon for that matter, then you're not paying attention. They're not even bothering with the pretense of separate companies anymore.

Right you are. I think the terms of the Global operation are just the first of the 'good things coming'.

 

[DirtyBeech]

Yeah. Corporate Wings operated, under Flops' certificate, with any ol' DAC pilot, and branded as Flexjet. Good things indeed

 

[doh]

Not exactly separate ops.

 

[X-rated]

Kind of like those responsible for the financial crisis should be held accountable? Oh wait, no, those were management types. No need to hold them accountable. Just demand a higher standard from the guys who try and hold management accountable. If management Fs up, bail 'em out...

I'm so tired of hearing that B.S. line. Yes, Banks exploited the rules put in place by government. What else would you expect them to do? Did they sometimes step over the line? Without question. But, they are certainly not wholly responsible for the financial crisis. When Bill Clinton made home ownership for all Americans a priority at his State of the Union address the die was cast. You want to hold the bank presidents responsible, but you don't feel the actual individuals who who bought homes they clearly could not afford and ultimately defaulted on should share in the blame at all right? If you're going to be pissed because banks failed to do proper due diligence, how come you place no blame at all on those who signed their name and blatantly lied? News flash, banks never would have gotten into the kind of subprime lending that let to the crash if were not for the government mandate to put low income buyers into homes they had no hope of affording. There was no MBS market before then, and no bank would have considered that type of "risky lending" had the government not pushed for it while guaranteeing the loans through Fannie and Freddie. Were corners cut? Yes. Did EVERYONE including the GSE's and bank regulators know about it? You bet your ass they did. Everyone knew they could flat out lie on a Stated Income loan for the low price of 1/2 of a percent added to the rate. School teachers and just about every other average citizen new about it. Do you really think the regulators and GSE's had no idea what was going on? Stop listening to the propaganda and think for a minute.

Without question the banks were culpable. So were the GSE's, regulators, politicians and wait for it.. consumers. My question to you is why you don't feel the folks that actually lied about their income and signed their name to mortgages they could not possibly afford bear no responsibility whatsoever?

Yeah man. It was all those bastard management types. It's a conspiracy, and I had no idea what was going on. Don't blame me, I'm too stupid to know I wasn't supposed to make schit up on my mortgage application. Besides, they let me get away with it, so it's all their fault.

Rant over... Please continue with the Pro/Con union snoozefest.

 

[BlueNose]

i'm so tired of hearing that b.s. Line. Yes, banks exploited the rules put in place by government. What else would you expect them to do? Did they sometimes step over the line? Without question. But, they are certainly not wholly responsible for the financial crisis. When bill clinton made home ownership for all americans a priority at his state of the union address the die was cast. You want to hold the bank presidents responsible, but you don't feel the actual individuals who who bought homes they clearly could not afford and ultimately defaulted on should share in the blame at all right? If you're going to be pissed because banks failed to do proper due diligence, how come you place no blame at all on those who signed their name and blatantly lied? News flash, banks never would have gotten into the kind of subprime lending that let to the crash if were not for the government mandate to put low income buyers into homes they had no hope of affording. There was no mbs market before then, and no bank would have considered that type of "risky lending" had the government not pushed for it while guaranteeing the loans through fannie and freddie. Were corners cut? Yes. Did everyone including the gse's and bank regulators know about it? You bet your ass they did. Everyone knew they could flat out lie on a stated income loan for the low price of 1/2 of a percent added to the rate. School teachers and just about every other average citizen new about it. Do you really think the regulators and gse's had no idea what was going on? Stop listening to the propaganda and think for a minute.

Without question the banks were culpable. So were the gse's, regulators, politicians and wait for it.. Consumers. My question to you is why you don't feel the folks that actually lied about their income and signed their name to mortgages they could not possibly afford bear no responsibility whatsoever?

Yeah man. It was all those bastard management types. It's a conspiracy, and i had no idea what was going on. Don't blame me, i'm too stupid to know i wasn't supposed to make schit up on my mortgage application. Besides, they let me get away with it, so it's all their fault.

Rant over... Please continue with the pro/con union snoozefest.

x 2...

 

[doh]

And the people who signed up for those loans were foreclosed on. And the politicians and financial institutions, collectively referred to as management by me, got taxpayer money. Management is not composed solely of business people. The United States has incentivized the rewards and socialized the risk. This will never turn out well. Now back on topic. The lines between the companies are being blurred to the point of erasure. Corporate Wings, on the FLOPS certificate and sold by Flex indeed.

 

[X-rated]

And the people who signed up for those loans were foreclosed on. And the politicians and financial institutions, collectively referred to as management by me, got taxpayer money. Management is not composed solely of business people. The United States has incentivized the rewards and socialized the risk. This will never turn out well.

The banks were actually given loans which were repaid with interest within a few months. Every single penny has been repaid plus interest. Would the homeowners that were foreclosed on have been in a position to repay bail out loans? They didn't have the cash flow to pay the loans they already had. Any new loans would have just buried them further and been more money written off. TARP was not a government give away. Do you really not see the difference?

 

[t-bone]

Glad to see X isn't spending all his time in the books learning his new G-ride...

 

[doh]

And do you really not see that we have incentivized the rewards while socializing the risk? Has that pay back with interest resulted in a lower debt or deficit for the taxpayer?