Hawaiian Pilot Throws Off Bankruptcy Trustee... Now That's Ball$y!

[flynryan15]

It amazes me

How many times do we hear that pilots need to take paycuts to save the airline? Then we hear of a CEO or some other Head Hauncho taking a buy out for millions of dollars!(Delta, USAIR) These Ba$tard$ bleed the airlines dry then turn on the hard working employees and blame them. Management should be paid small base pay and a percentage of the profits. What the Management of USAIR and Delta did was borderline criminal.

Especially USAIR the company is bleeding money and can barely open its doors everyday and the CEO resigns taking millions. After a short term with the company at which he managed to do nothing but make horrible decisions. Am I wrong or wasn't he brought in to fix things? He didn't fix a thing but still got his winning lottery ticket!!!!!


I think the only mistake this pilot made was not waiting till the airplane was taxing to the runway and then throw him out.

 

[Jim]

MW44 - I did not take it as you trying to trash HAL pay. Just throwing my 2 cents in. I agree with you about the $3 million management bonus proposal being crazy.

Jetops - HAL's reported profits are based on paying our bills as if we are NOT in bankruptcy. When everything is settled and the final accounting is done, our profits will be higher. HAL ALPA has filed many objections over the $7 million in profit sharing that has been paid to employees since the 4th quarter of last year. Our contention is that any profit must be calculated after all required payments are made to our retirement plan, not before as Gutbomb is currently doing. Our pension plan paysments are an obligation that are not being paid so there is no profit until all obligations are paid. Further, the profit sharing was part of the concession plans the various labor groups took in 2003. Our dispatchers refused to give concessions last year and have not received any profit sharing. Why should management be treated different? Management did not take any concessions or pay cuts than so why should they share in profit sharing now? Gutbomb's management profit plan is not correcting any situation - it would be unfair to the sacrifices endured by all HAL employees. I did not take a 100% paycut to pay management more. They should not get a bonus for furloughing me and hundreds of other HAL employees. This is causing a lot of heartburn to all HAL unions, not just the pilots.

You say Capt. Craig Kobayashi has a vendetta against Gotbaum. I say all HAL employees have a vendetta against Gutbomb. The man has no airline experience and it is obvious. He has alienated all the unions and called our profits a fluke until their consistency forced him to acknowledge we aren't a failing company needing him as a savior. Everything he said about the company when he initially took over as Trustee was wrong. His biggest concern is trying to maximize the size of the bonus the judge grants him when we emerge this fall. His original plan called for deep wage cuts and termination of all pension plans (except management) - everything was on the backs of the employees. Time has proven, as ALPA's financial analyst said, that this is not necessary. I have no doubt Gutbomb's presence caused Capt. Kobayashi significant stress that could have affected his ability to fly safely. After all, Gutbomb is trying to take the retirement he has been earning and counting on for the last 25 years away. Gutbomb is a parasite that is trying to build his resume and bank account from the hard work and sacrafices of employees that he shares no history with. He lucked into the job and does not care who he buries in his quest for personal gain.

As far as thinking HAL is still flying DC-10s, that is a common mistake as we did fly them until just over a year ago. If you read our contract, which is available online in many locations, you will see it reads as if the DC-10 is the primary international aircraft. MW44's mistake is hardly earth shattering.

 

[EAP]

On my last 777 recurrent we did a hot, heavy (648k) V1 cut. Took 18 miles to get to 800AGL to clean up. At the "FUEL LEVER" part of the checklist the check airman put the sim on freeze and said, "you are about to make a $750million dollar decision (refering to the pax liability plus airframe cost). Don't let anyone EVER tell you you are overpaid."


Management doesn't have anywhere close to this type of responsibility.


Here at AMR management took 1.6billion a year from the employees and used 43mil to guarantee their retirements in case of BK.

To Hawaiian Captain Kobayashi I say "mahalo"

Unit

Well stated!!! And, if I may add, it's not just the fuel lever decision that makes the airline pilot.... and the whole industry reputation, and a safe, viable transportation system for our country. It is also the 200 decisions the captain and first officer made leading to the way they postured and flew that jet so that at the critical moment, they all had a way out of this shoebox. That's when all their planning, experience and quality professionalism speaks for every last one of us in this business.

I have sometimes felt annoyed when a sheltered pilot who happens to be on the front end of a hiring wave flying new equipment on easy routes comments on how easy this job is. Eventually that comment cements itself into the general consensus of some people's perspective. Then you get the "Bus Driver" comments and just plain lack of understanding on what goes into all of this.

Like old Ernest Gann, author of "Fate is the Hunter" said... "Anyone can do this job when things are going right. In this business we play for keeps..."

It's very easy to get complacent and not have a clue as to how far out into the abiss we can get if that one event occurs. Not only do we need to understand that our paychecks and some level of respect from our employers are a representation of our worth, but we need to not all brag about how easy we have it. Because we don't. We just happen to like the work a lot, so it's easier to work darn hard and not break a sweat. But by no means should that deminish the hard work we do!

Cheers to all (even the hard working managers) and fly safe.

 

[TonyC]

On accuracy...

You’re not too smart are you? You most likely have the mentality shoot first question later right. NEWS FLASH they don’t fly dc-10. I suggest you read what you write and make sure it fairly accurate before you post it . Because you can change it with the new board setting they have on flight info

Since you chose to take MW44 to task for including DC-10 in his post, I feel it only fitting that I submit your post to some extra scrutiny.



Let us begin, shall we.

[font=&quot]It kind of hard to squeeze blood out of turnip[/font]…

I assume you meant to say "It's kind of hard..." or "It is kind of hard..." Omitting the verb from a sentence makes you appear to be uneducated or, at least, illiterate. You should be more careful, you know, "read what you write and make sure it fairly accurate before you post it ."

[font=&quot] Incase you did know there in bankruptcy. [/font]

As far as I know, there is not a word "Incase." You must have meant to put a space between "In" and "case," right? And you've committed the common error of illiterates by using the noun, pronoun, adjective, or adverb "there" instead of the contraction "they're" (for "they are"). It would also be appropriate to punctuate the sentence with a comma between the main and subordinate clauses, i.e., "In case you didn't know, they're in bankruptcy.". You should be more careful, you know, "read what you write and make sure it fairly accurate before you post it ."

[font=&quot] The company would not be around if they had not done some of the thing they did to save the company .[/font]

Some of the "thing"? Is that how you talk around home, too? The correct word here should be plural, otherwise "some of" doesn't apply. If it were a single thing, the correct sentence would have read "they had not done the thing". I believe you meant to say "some of the things", right? OH, and the space should come after the period at the end of the sentence, not before. You should be more careful, you know, "read what you write and make sure it fairly accurate before you post it ."

[font=&quot]If the company around there will be jobs for pilots and all the other people that support them .[/font]

OH, my. The task of interpreting gets a bit more confused. I'm assuming, based on a pattern I've observed, that you've omitted the verb again. It looks like you meant to say, "If the company is around..." And the period is misplaced again. We normally put it immediately after the last word of the sentence with no intervening space. You should be more careful, you know, "read what you write and make sure it fairly accurate before you post it ."

[font=&quot]If the company make some money they will gives some if it back to the people that work there .. [/font]

I'd really like to find a sentence that I don't need to correct, but you're not making this easy. Subject-verb agreement is the problem here. If the subject is a singular entity, the verb should be that for a singular entity. If it's a plural entity, then the plural verb applies. Company is a singular entity, just like "A person" or "John." You wouldn't say "John make..." (well, at least if you were speaking proper grammar) or "A person make...", you'd say "John makes..." and "A person makes...". Similarly, this should be "the company makes some money..." Now, unless you're talking about someone other than the object of the first phrase (the company) the pronoun used in the second is also incorrect. Break the sentence down and read just these words: "the company... they" and you might see how awkward that sounds. What we should read here is "the company... it" Now we arrive at the verb of the second clause or phrase, "will gives." I really do hope you don't talk like that, or that you're used to hearing that kind of talk. What it should be is "will give." OH, and let's not forget the comma that should separate the clauses. Once again, the period is misplaced. Let me run the whole corrected sentence by you and see if it doesn't sound better. "If the company makes some money, it will give some of it back to the people that work there." You should be more careful, you know, "read what you write and make sure it fairly accurate before you post it ."

[font=&quot] I will post a article for you to read [/font]

Such a short sentence, but still I must comment. The appropriate article is determined by the consonant or vowel sound that begins the word that follows. Perhaps that's too complicated for you, so I'll try to explain. You wrote "a article". "Article" begins with a vowel sound (vowels are a, e, i, o, and u... sometimes y). Since it begins with a vowel sound, the word we use in front of it is "an", not "a". We use "a" when the word that follows it begins with a consonant sound (all the letters except the vowels). For example, it would be appropriate to use "a" before "moron" because "moron" begins with a consonant sound ("m" is a consonant). So, it would be correct to say "an article" instead of "a article" and "a moron" instead of "an moron." You omitted the punctuation at the end of the sentence. By the strictest rules of grammar, it should have been a colon ( : ) since the sentence referred to an article to follow. However, I'm certain that that rule is quite relaxed on a forum such as this, and a period would suffice. You should be more careful, you know, "read what you write and make sure it fairly accurate before you post it ."

So the proposal there offering is legal under bankruptcy…

Almost made it without an error, but fell into that old there/their/they're trap again. Once again, you should have used "they're." You should be more careful, you know, "read what you write and make sure it fairly accurate before you post it ."

If you don’t know what bankruptcy is here the text book definition

Apart from the missing colon or period at the end, and the missing comma between "is" and "here," this looks almost correct. However, I believe you intended to say that the definition you are about to provide comes from a book we use as a text in a formal educational setting. If such is the case, you should have used "textbook" the noun rather than the combination of "text" (adjective) and "book" (noun). But wait, "text" is NOT an adjective, so this makes no sense at all. Yes, I am convinced you meant to say "textbook." You should be more careful, you know, "read what you write and make sure it fairly accurate before you post it ."

For you information the pliot’s name was Capt. Craig Kobayashi and he had a vendetta against Gotbaum.

Sigh. This is getting old. How many sentences now, and not a single one fashioned according to recognized structures of grammar and spelling. The second word I assume should be "your," the possessive pronoun that most closely matches the word you chose and makes the sentence make sense. Since we’re on an Aviation Forum, you could at least spell “pilot” correctly, right? I'm going to stop commenting about the punctuation, as that aspect is getting really old. You should be more careful, you know, "read what you write and make sure it fairly accurate before you post it ."


TO BE CONTINUED…

 

[TonyC]

On Accuracy...

PART II

This was real professional of Capt. Craig Kobayashi kicking for a person because you don’t like them .

Where do I begin? I cannot change a word or two or add a word or two to make sense of this sentence. I can only judge from the character of this post that you meant to say something like this: "This was real professional of Capt. Craig Kobayashi for kicking a person off the airplane because he didn't like him." Of course, I could be confused. There might be a punt/pass/kick competition involved here and Capt. Kobayashi was taking someone's place in the kicking competition - "kicking for a person" - and since he's a bad kicker, it would do the other team a disfavor, hence the "because you don't like them" explanation. So, I guess I really can't help with this sentence. If you want people to understand what you have to say, you should be more careful, you know, "read what you write and make sure it fairly accurate before you post it ."

Just show the where his maturity level was at maybe five year old …

Looking for the simplest way to modify this sentence to make any sense of it at all, in context or out, leads me to believe that you intended to say "them" instead of "the." While that would leave me thinking you committed a simple typographical error, which we all certainly excuse around here, it unfortunately leaves the rest of the sentence in sore need of reconstruction. Do you want us to know what "his" maturity level was when "he" was five years old, or do you want us to think that he displayed the maturity of a five-year-old? If the latter is the case, as I would surmise from your tone, then the sentence should look more like this: "That just shows that his maturity level is that of a five-year-old." You should be more careful, you know, "read what you write and make sure it fairly accurate before you post it ."

You’re not too smart are you?

Except for a missing comma, you got this one right. Could it be because you've heard it frequently? Insert a comma after "smart" to make this work. You're not too smart, are you? You should be more careful, you know, "read what you write and make sure it fairly accurate before you post it ."

NEWS FLASH they don’t fly dc-10.

You should capitalize the designator for the airplane, i.e., "DC-10." Unless they only have one DC-10, you need to refer to them with a plural (DC-10's). It would be correct, but less clear, I suppose, to say "They don't fly a DC-10." I guess you, as the author, could choose between those two alternatives. Either way, the sentence also requires punctuation, a colon, after "NEWS FLASH," and the first word following should be capitalized. So, it should read "NEWS FLASH: They don't fly DC-10's." You should be more careful, you know, "read what you write and make sure it fairly accurate before you post it ."

I suggest you read what you write and make sure it fairly accurate before you post it .

Ahh, the irony.



I've been waiting patiently to get to this one, because it's fouled up, too. And when you're going to be flaming on someone for inaccuracy, you should at least take the time to be accurate yourself. A comma is in order after the first clause, and a VERB is required to make sense of the second. "Make sure it IS fairly accurate before you post it." And for the love of Pete, put the period BEFORE the space, not after! You should be more careful, you know, "read what you write and make sure it fairly accurate before you post it ."

Because you can change it with the new board setting they have on flight info

NO, you cannot. Oh, is this a misstatement, or another word omitted? Did you mean to say, "you can not change it"? That's what I thought. I guess you were running out of periods once you got this far.



You know, you really should be more careful to read what you write, and make sure it IS fairly accurate before you post it.


OH, and I almost forgot...

 

[English]

TonyC,

While I agree with everything you wrote, it sure seems like you have a lot of time on your hands! Maybe you could help me lobby Mark for a spell checker on this board? I've tried and haven't gotten very far.

I've been using an internet explorer add-on - www.iespell.com - but it doesn't catch grammatical errors.

 

[TonyC]

TonyC,

While I agree with everything you wrote, it sure seems like you have a lot of time on your hands! Maybe you could help me lobby Mark for a spell checker on this board? I've tried and haven't gotten very far.

Yes, ma'am. Time on my hands... it's called Reserve! What kids are not at Grandma's house are watching a movie because it's raining outside and I can't take 'em swimming. The wife is sleeping because she's working nights and... well, you've already heard too much...

As for the spell checker... I usually work "without a net" so to speak, but when I compose a post such as the last (one where I expect a good deal of scrutiny) I'll either copy and paste it to a word processor (Word) and use that spell checker and grammar checker or I'll simply start out composing there, and copy and paste to Flight Info when I'm done. I imagine that's faster than any type of spellchecker Mark could add through the internet. Even so, the best method is proofreading. You may notice I had to edit the above posts, as even the Microsoft Word tools failed to catch a few errors that I caught in a hurried (gotta beat the 10-minute buzzer ! ) proofreading spree.

And I usually don't pick on anybody's spelling, grammar, and especially punctuation, unless they've done something to highlight themselves (ala jetops flaming MW44) or it's particularly amusing (ala the "Holly War"). After all, we're all human, and we should be able to relax around here a bit, right?

 

[AV80R]

"You’re not too smart are you?
Except for a missing comma, you got this one right. Could it be because you've heard it frequently?"

TonyC – that was hilarious, couldn't stop laughing.



I think he probably deserved to get spanked just for the language he used in his first post.



Now that I think about it, I hope the spell checker caught all errors in this message…

…and I do wish a spell check was an option at flighinfo.com.

 

[Trojan]

Michael Moore was my hero until TonyC chose to enlighten us today.

The Golden Rule has never been so eloquently displayed!

 

[HAL]

Thank you, thank you, thank you!

Tony C,

I read jetops post, wincing all the way, wishing I had my red editors pencil available. Then I read your post - I was smiling the whole way though! People who can't use the english language properly are growing in number each day. The "dumbing down" of America needs to stop. Thanks for your efforts!!

As far as Captain Kobayashi's incident, he'll be my hero forever. Gotbaum has nobody but himself and his own profit in mind. His arrogance is exceeded only by his inability to understand how an airline works. He needs to go and Hawaiian needs to be back on track, making money and growing like it should.

HAL

 

[islandhopper]

HAL's labor cost are not that low. Our pay is closer to the average than most realize with a lot smaller pay gap than there used to be (unfortunately due to their pay lowering rather than our pay increasing). Our post-9/11 concessions did not include a pay cut but instead resulted in work rule changes. What also adds to HAL's labor cost is we carry at least 2 extra FAs per flight above the FAA minimum. We're big on customer service and our FA's contract results in a lot of double and triple overtime for the senior ones.

Hey JIM, long time no see. When they gonna call you guys back and start hiring again? Craig has some full size ones for sure. I'll be keeping an eye out for him around HNL and will shake his hand. If they dont try to yank his medical or something for having anger management problems. I salute him but dont know if I would be able to do the same. Thats ballzout.

 

[Jim]

Islandhopper,

Who knows when we will be called back, but I do believe there will be hiring with the last of the recalls. Every potential buyer has included expansion in their proposals and it's all long range stuff (non-stop east coast & far east). I was once told by our head of crew scheduling that each long range destination flown on a daily basis would require a minimum of 30 pilots so 3 of these gets everyone back and the 4th brings hiring. There are at least 5 east coast and 3 far east destinations that HAL has been eye-ballling for the last 2 or 3 years. Once this bankruptcy ends in the fall some expansion should start. How much and how quick depends on which plan gets the Judge's seal of approval.

I'm 4 from the bottom. If I'm recalled by next summer I'll be quite happy. But I think this is probably the best case scenario and I'm planning on being out longer (hope for the best, plan for the worst).

 

[CatYaaak]

This guy clearly has some brass cajones! Would you do the same if you were in his position? Read the gutsy move below:



Hawaiian Air pilot throws off bankruptcy trustee
Monday June 28, 3:58 pm ET


SEATTLE, June 28 (Reuters) - Discount air travel is a popular perk for most airline employees, but if you are running a bankrupt carrier, certain restrictions may apply.

Joshua Gotbaum, the trustee overseeing Hawaiian Airlines' reorganization, was thrown off a flight from Honolulu to San Francisco last Thursday by the pilot who said Gotbaum's presence made him uncomfortable.

"The pilot informed Mr. Gotbaum that he wasn't comfortable having him on the plane. They had a brief discussion, but rather than delay the flight, Mr. Gotbaum took another flight," airline spokesman Keoni Wagner said, without elaborating.

Hawaiian, which filed for bankruptcy in March 2003, has posted profits in recent months, helped in part by negotiating reduced airplane lease payments.

Gotbaum has also proposed cutting pilot pension payouts to save money, but last week came up with a $3 million management bonus plan.

Federal policy gives pilots wide discretion to remove passengers or refuse to let them board for safety reasons, but they rarely do so. Wagner said Gotbaum was the only Hawaiian passenger he could remember being booted.

Very immature power trip. Sounds to me like the pilot isn't able to switch off the emotions and screw his flying head on. The authority to remove someone is given in the interest of removing to threat to pax, crew, or aircraft safety, and in this instance that threat was the captain himself and his inability to contain his emotions, not someone (non-threatening, non-unruly, non-intoxicated) sitting in the cabin he just doesn't happen to like.

The professional thing for the captain to have done would've been to recognize his own threat to safety due to emotional instability and inability to restrain himself from mis-wielding the captains authority entrusted to him against a non-threatening passenger, and taken himself off the flight.

 

[Hugh Jorgan]

Very immature power trip. Sounds to me like the pilot isn't able to switch off the emotions and screw his flying head on.

I don't think anyone really has a hard time seeing through the facade of safety here. It's more about using a technicality to put the screws to someone. Are you telling me management (scheduling) has never found a technicality that clearly violated the spirit of a work rule, but put you at work when you shouldn't have been? Wake up.

 

[TonyC]

The professional thing for the captain to have done would've been to recognize his own threat to safety due to emotional instability and inability to restrain himself from mis-wielding the captains authority entrusted to him against a non-threatening passenger, and taken himself off the flight.

And then the flight would have been delayed.

I think it was very professional of him to ask the gentleman to leave, and then to safely carry the remaining passengers to their destination on time.

 

[CatYaaak]

And then the flight would have been delayed.

I think it was very professional of him to ask the gentleman to leave, and then to safely carry the remaining passengers to their destination on time.

The captain didn't give a rat's a$$ about getting the pax there on time, otherwise HE wouldn't have initiated the confrontation on board the aircraft prior to departure. The credit for avoiding the delay goes to the one acting like a "gentleman", not the tantrum-thrower.

I worked for an airline that was run into the gound by senior mngmt, and flew the universally-disliked CEO/Pres many times, as most of us did. I don't think it ever occured to any of us to bump him off a flight/create a show because of our own personal opinions. Professionalism demands that you leave your personal hang-ups at the jetbridge door, and treat everyone equally, ESPECIALLY when things aren't going well. If you can't do that....remove yourself from flight status, you owe it to those put their trust in you.

The guy was showboating, and unilaterally created the "situation". If this rates as "very professional" and gets peer-applause in the airline world these days, then I'm doubly glad not to be there.

 

[Hugh Jorgan]

If this rates as "very professional" and gets peer-applause in the airline world these days, then I'm doubly glad not to be there.

And you should be tripley happy to not be there when you consider what sort of professionalism Gautbaum has shown in his actions since being appointed trustee. Think of the peer-applause HE is getting. Get real. The guy is scum and he was treated accordingly in one of the rare instances when the tables could be turned, if only for a few moments. Mature? Professional? Perhaps not, but the public took notice. It's not just the airline business. The nation is tired of corporate criminals lining their pockets off the backs of those who have put their lives into their work.

 

[CatYaaak]

And you should be tripley happy to not be there when you consider what sort of professionalism Gautbaum has shown in his actions since being appointed trustee. Think of the peer-applause HE is getting. Get real. The guy is scum and he was treated accordingly in one of the rare instances when the tables could be turned, if only for a few moments. Mature? Professional? Perhaps not, but the public took notice. It's not just the airline business. The nation is tired of corporate criminals lining their pockets off the backs of those who have put their lives into their work.

Then you agree.....showboating. So the public took notice....how on earth is that relevant?...do you think they'll spontaneously rise up and launch a boycott of the airline or something? For your information, the public already thinks that airline pilots are paid well-above your average joe. If they concern themselves with salary issues not their own, it's going to be about the pay of police, firemen, or teachers. The only "airline pilot issues" to become part of a national discussion and conciousness recently is thanks to a few being busted by TSA for showing up to work after having a few too many drinks.

The is FAR more worried about that and the best deal for tickets than they are for your retirement. Unionized or not, the day the public considers you to be "labour" in the sense of coal miners or lettuce pickers, is the day I'll eat my Che Guevera t-shirt.

I'm curious though, was there ever a time when this nation wasn't tired of corporate criminals? I mean, if it's a crime, then by definition society doesn't approve. If it's not a crime and you're using the term loosely to describe something you find unfair from your perspective about our economic system, then I guess nobody told you that life doesn't always seem fair.

 

[ChinaClipper]

Toss Rotbaum over the side.....

This scum, like sooo many other airline managers, needs a visit from my Samoan bruddahs! Capt K is putting his foot down to stop the piliging of a good operation, an act that is long oversue! Its bad enough to have Adams shafting the employees to enrichen himself and have the "savior" be a twit like Gutbomb. If I see Capt. K I'll buy him a Primo! (sorry, not in production) the Beer of his choice!! Too bad the Mesa pilots didn't have the same commitment to the profession as this man! Kudos!

 

[MW44]

China-

Did you vote no when you worked for Mesa?