NWA MEC Buffoons

[Noserider76]

I appreciate your willingness to debate the data and abstain from personal attacks.

Dude, calling you a liar was a BS manuever. No need to aplologize. The fact is that we (all of us) need to force management's hand to commit to a mainline replacement for these old (yes, they're ancient. I flew it and they were ancient 9 years ago) dinosaurs that are on the ragged edge of their lifespan. Both sides can throw out any numbers they want, but like it or not, it's a big issue for a large part of the combined group. I'm not interested in gaining leverage. I'm interested in keeping the jobs of everyone who's here now, and calming some of the uncertainty in this whole screwed up process.

The reps on both sides need to stop the childish attack-retaliation loop and start working on our behalf. There are many things that need to be in the joint contract but one of the key points, in my opinion, is to get language that ensures DC-9's will be replaced 1 for 1 by mainline aircraft.

 

[~~~^~~~]

you got an amen from this corner.

 

[FDJ2]

Dude, calling you a liar was a BS manuever. No need to aplologize.

Thanks, I appreciate that.

I'm not above apologizing for a misunderstanding, but I must admit, I was stunned. Generally Occam is level headed. This was nothing more than a misunderstanding. I'm sure Occam will eventually realize that and come to the conclusion that there was no intent to deceive and that I had previously posted info on the DC-9-30, just 2 posts up and provided a link for further unbiased analysis. One poster has even engaged in a productive exchange on the information provided. I've extended a good faith apology for any misunderstanding, once Occam realizes that it was nothing more than a misunderstanding, like the man I believe he is, he'll retract his statement.

The fact is that we (all of us) need to force management's hand to commit to a mainline replacement for these old (yes, they're ancient. I flew it and they were ancient 9 years ago) dinosaurs that are on the ragged edge of their lifespan.

Management will have to deal with that issue not because we pressure them, but because the aircraft is past its prime. A great aircraft in its day, much like the 707, Connie and DC-3, but now due for retirement. By necessity, it will need to be replaced in the near future.

Currently there is only a band-aid replacement, emphasis on band-aid, for the venerable 9, a combination of 76 seat CRJs, E-175s, A319s and MD-88/90s.

When the next generation 100-120 seater appears, it needs to be a mainline aircraft.

Both sides can throw out any numbers they want, but like it or not, it's a big issue for a large part of the combined group.

I know it is, for me too. The fate of the 747-200 is also on the radar screen.

I'm not interested in gaining leverage. I'm interested in keeping the jobs of everyone who's here now, and calming some of the uncertainty in this whole screwed up process.

Time has a way of calming those uncertainties.

The reps on both sides need to stop the childish attack-retaliation loop and start working on our behalf.

I think we are on our way, however, to be fair, after a month of DALPA bashing, DALPA has only just responded and only with two communiques.

The good news, IMO, is that maybe the message has been received, the latest hotline from NALPA, May 20th I believe, strikes the right note.

Hopefully we can get back on track. There will be bumps in the road between here and single operating certificate, joint contract and SLI, but I think we can get there. At least I hope we can.

There are many things that need to be in the joint contract but one of the key points, in my opinion, is to get language that ensures DC-9's will be replaced 1 for 1 by mainline aircraft.

That's an excellent point and input. Please e-mail your rep, attend an LEC meeting if able and express that to them.

 

[Occam's Razor]

I'm sure Occam will eventually realize that and come to the conclusion that there was no intent to deceive and that I had previously posted info on the DC-9-30, just 2 posts up and provided a link for further unbiased analysis. One poster has even engaged in a productive exchange on the information provided. I've extended a good faith apology for any misunderstanding, once Occam realizes that it was nothing more than a misunderstanding, like the man I believe he is, he'll retract his statement.

Golly! That's how it works?

Veritas #2008-01, published by your MEC, claims it's "...designed to counter these misstatements of the facts."

Veritas #2008-02 tells us "A half-truth is the most cowardly of lies"

You made a misstatement of the facts and expect a pass. Had my MEC done what you did, we'd all be reading Veritas #2008-03 regarding selective use of fuel efficiency data. Then a thread would be started here proclaiming the NWA MEC to be "buffoons", and you'd jump in...strictly in the interests of fraternity and brotherhood, of course.

See the real issue here?

You extracted one data point from the analysis, and stated it as a factual conclusion: DC-9's provide 28 ASM's per gallon. The data point happened to be irrelevant, since the aircraft you chose to reference hasn't been here in many years. You did it because it made your case appear stronger. According to your MEC, you are a cowardly liar. I merely saved them having to accuse one of their own o being such.

Now put that "misstatement" in the context of discussions at the table or official pronouncements from your leadership...and you'll get a feel for the problem with tit-for-tat carping at each other.

Had my MEC been focused on spanking your leadership, they'd have made a big deal out of the stunning misstatement ("cowardly lie") published by your Chairman, claiming DAL pilots are the only group to provide medical benefits to their furloughed members.

The fact is...they weren't the first, the largest, or for the longest. We did it FIRST in 1992. In fact, your MEC got the details on how to do it from our Membership Committee Chairman.

I suppose we could have published our own "Veritas" to tweak you with the actual facts, but the decision was made not to. It wasn't that big a deal. Kinda like harping on WHO coordinated seats at a Congressional hearing.

Give my team the same consideration you give your own team, and you expect right here on this Forum...you "cowardly liar".

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

oyster shells from Spondivits .

hmmmmmm Spondivits......

where the oysters can get you dead....

 

[Cobraair75drvr]

FDJ2,

As it seems you like to crunch numbers, could you do a comparison btw your different versions of 76s and our 330s?

 

[Schwanker]

The fact is...they weren't the first, the largest, or for the longest. We did it FIRST in 1992. In fact, your MEC got the details on how to do it from our Membership Committee Chairman.

Heard he was a hell of a guy--story teller, philanderer, BSer, drunk, liar, occasional pilot, skirt chaser, sheep herder, lion tamer, professional masterbator, giant killer and his head fit perfectly in a jar... What did I miss?

Schwanker

 

[Cobraair75drvr]

Don't forget a McDreamy type head of hair. Oh wait, at least he is not in denial with the early stage combover that I have going on.

 

[Schwanker]

FDJ2,

As it seems you like to crunch numbers, could you do a comparison btw your different versions of 76s and our 330s?

WHAT? They have 767s? I thought they were all old and retired! They're going to park all those old archaic fuel-inefficient aircraft! What kind of airline do they run over there anyways?

Schwanker

 

[Schwanker]

Don't forget a McDreamy type head of hair. Oh wait, at least he is not in denial with the early stage combover that I have going on.

Great Point! Legend has it he was the next coming of Arthur Fonzarelli!