PAKISTANI sues JetBlue! WOW!!!

[dukeaviator]

If he has a recorded conversation or an email saying what he "claims" was said, then give him millions. If not, give him this link http://www.infoporium.com/ he may need it in a few years when he looses his suit. Lawyers go through a lot of trouble to "prep" a client on what to say and claim before they go public.

DING! DING! DING! DING!

 

[dukeaviator]

And before anyone states it is not admissable in a court of law..see below

State of New York
N.Y. Penal Law §250.00(1)

It is lawful to record a telephone conversation if one is a party to the conversation or has received the consent of a party to the communication. Accord People v. Lasher, 447 N.E.2d. 70, 71 (N.Y. 1983).

 

[Hung Start]

Ahh, no lawyer here,, but isn't that criminal law??

I thought this was a civil case. Might be a wee bit different.

And I bet J/B will easily show that was one employees statements (if it is indeed true), not the statement of the Corporation as a whole.

Hung

 

[dukeaviator]

Ahh, no lawyer here,, but isn't that criminal law??

I thought this was a civil case. Might be a wee bit different.

And I bet J/B will easily show that was one employees statements (if it is indeed true), not the statement of the Corporation as a whole.

Hung

WRONG!!! Crimminal law states one would need a warrant to record a conversation and only for probable cause.....4th Admendment.

As for the employee, the Employee is a representative of the Corporation thereby making the Corporation Liable!

 

[brainhurts]

I am going to place my bet that someone on the hiring comittee knew this guy back at Indy, or possibly somewhere else. Might go back years. Our "friend" was off his game that day, made a snide remark, bad joke, whatever. Somehow, burnt a bridge.

And, the guy on the comittee remembered.

NOT!

Thats all it takes. Show me any air carrier that does not do the same. There are just so many qualified applicants (and I'm giving our "friend" the benefit of the doubt) that it just takes one gig to knock you out of the box.

And, to answer the question of "why would anybody file a suit unless he was sure to win", I bet this guy was hurt really bad, as we all would be. Nobody enjoys rejection. Not me, not you. So, he was really p/o'd and figurd this was the way to lash out. And once you get hold of a lawyer, who feeds you with all the great ideas, the ball is rolling. And, at that point it is tough to back down.

Your act as if this guy has never received an rejection letter before. WRONG AGAIN!

What is your problem Duke? I am sure this crybaby is full of $hit, however, if JB screwed up and made this harsh statement--(which I am very confident they did not)--and he has proof, he wins a bunch of money. I am very familiar with the process at JB, and I know his version of the story does not match the process. This is a case of a guy not getting picked for professional/work/personality conflict/traffic tickets/credit check/etc etc and then rolling out the race card. He got wrapped up in his lawyers version, and here we are arguing about it. By the way, I thought you said you were done with this thread. I am tired of looking at your child like drivel. Do us a favor and buzz off.

 

[dukeaviator]

What is your problem Duke? I am sure this crybaby is full of $hit, however, if JB screwed up and made this harsh statement--(which I am very confident they did not)--and he has proof, he wins a bunch of money. I am very familiar with the process at JB, and I know his version of the story does not match the process. This is a case of a guy not getting picked for professional/work/personality conflict/traffic tickets/credit check/etc etc and then rolling out the race card. He got wrapped up in his lawyers version, and here we are arguing about it. By the way, I thought you said you were done with this thread. I am tired of looking at your child like drivel. Do us a favor and buzz off.

You speak as if you have evidence or first hand knowledge of the incident. If you do, my advise to you is to bring forth the information to your corporation attorney attention. Since you're quite familiar with the hiring process, one would look at all the facts before trying this case in public. But I suspect your level of knowledge is only limited to your own hiring experience!

 

[Hung Start]

Ok Duke:

You seem personaly involved here, and I am certainly not. But I still stand on the fact that if a Corporation can show 6 years of doing it right, one HR persons statement on the phone will not convince a jury to give this guy a boatload of cash. ( and I sure haven't gone to the tape)

And he has just commited job suicide. (as far as any major will go)

I'll sleep well tonight, because, I really do not care. This is only discussion for me. Be interested to see how it plays out, though. My peso is on J/B.

Hung

 

[shooter]

And of course you have proof of this? Facts please... Stick to the facts.

A shadowy group calling itself the Army of God has taken responsibility for the recent bombing of an abortion clinic in Birmingham, Alabama, that killed one person. Two letters from the group, which also took responsibility for two bombings in Atlanta last year, were intercepted February 2 by federal authorities. The letters were addressed to the Atlanta office of the Reuters news agency and the Atlanta Journal and Constitution newspaper.
Officials said the letters, reportedly identical, were similar to those in which the group had claimed responsibility for the Atlanta bombings of an abortion clinic and a gay night club. For example, all the letters were written in block type. Woody Endersen, the federal official heading the investigation of the bombings, said he believes all the letters came from the same source. "The handwriting and other elements are identical," he noted.
The letters pertaining to the latest bombing were reportedly postmarked in Birmingham and mailed January 29--the same day as the bombing there. "The bombing in Birmingham was carried out by the Army of God," asserted the letters. "Let those who work in the murder mills around the nation be warned once more--you will be targeted without quarter--you are not immune from retaliation. Your commissars in Washington can't protect you." The letters also said anyone connected with the selling of the abortion pill RU-486 would be targeted.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Army_of_God


Next time do your own research. lazy @$$

 

[brainhurts]

You speak as if you have evidence or first hand knowledge of the incident. If you do, my advise to you is to bring forth the information to your corporation attorney attention. Since you're quite familiar with the hiring process, one would look at all the facts before trying this case in public. But I suspect your level of knowledge is only limited to your own hiring experience!

You speak as you have first hand knowledge! You keep infering there are telephone tapes and represent yourself as a lawyer. The JB hiring process is very open, and the end result is taken care of by one individual who has had contact with probably 1,200+ pilots on a one on one basis. There are no "managers" to point the finger at. Lets look at the facts and decide. Like I say, if some strange thing happened, and this guy has proof, then he wins. I am fine with that and I will admit I am wrong. However, I am convinced knowing the individuals involved, that it went down like my previous post. You are trying the case in public. It seems you are on the crybaby's side and are plugging a distorted, non factual, scenario. What compounds your problem is the 1200+ pilots who also know the process, and your version is so wrong, its laughable. I do not think the company attorney is particularly worried about this case.

 

[dukeaviator]

Ok Duke:

You seem personaly involved here, and I am certainly not. But I still stand on the fact that if a Corporation can show 6 years of doing it right, one HR persons statement on the phone will not convince a jury to give this guy a boatload of cash. ( and I sure haven't gone to the tape)

You'll be surprise what a jury of your peers will award you. (Stella Liebeck v. McDonalds)

And he has just commited job suicide. (as far as any major will go)

If he wins, he won't need a job. JB will pay for his retirement.

I'll sleep well tonight, because, I really do not care. This is only discussion for me. Be interested to see how it plays out, though. My peso is on J/B.

Peso...funny you should use that terminology because it doesn't amount to anything that you buy in this country...lol

 

[dukeaviator]

represent yourself as a lawyer.

If you read all my previous messages, I made no statement referencing your statement!

Like I say, if some strange thing happened, and this guy has proof, then he wins. I am fine with that and I will admit I am wrong.

Stay Tune!

I do not think the company attorney is particularly worried about this case.

why should he be worried. He gets paid regardless if he wins or lose.

 

[Hung Start]

ok, Duke, I promise this is my last response tonight.

The McDonald case, I believe that was the hot coffee, yes?

Micky D's own franchisees had complned for years that the coffee was too hot. Numerous letters to headquarters were presented, from all over the county from the people running the stores. This was what got that case lost. I just have not heard a lot of bad issues with J/B's hiring.

And, the only real issue I have with this discussion, is that "if he wins J/B pays for his retirement."

That I say is BS. Hurts us all. And, it will not cure a thing.

Hung

 

[dukeaviator]

ok, Duke, I promise this is my last response tonight.

The McDonald case, I believe that was the hot coffee, yes?

Micky D's own franchisees had complned for years that the coffee was too hot. Numerous letters to headquarters were presented, from all over the county from the people running the stores. This was what got that case lost. I just have not heard a lot of bad issues with J/B's hiring.

And, the only real issue I have with this discussion, is that "if he wins J/B pays for his retirement."

That I say is BS. Hurts us all. And, it will not cure a thing.

Hung

The only people who gets hurt are the people who don't comply with the civil rights laws and the American Constitution. Stay Tune!

 

[brainhurts]

represent yourself as a lawyer.

If you read all my previous messages, I made no statement referencing your statement!
Dude, you are a f'ing tool. I am saying you are coming off like a know it all lawyer--and you say you made no statement referencing my statement. You are wasting my time.
Like I say, if some strange thing happened, and this guy has proof, then he wins. I am fine with that and I will admit I am wrong.

Stay Tune!
OK, I will "Stay Tune" or as they say in this country, "STAY TUNED"

I do not think the company attorney is particularly worried about this case.

why should he be worried. He gets paid regardless if he wins or lose.

You are making up words to fill up space. Your point is lost because you are an Islamist sympathizer trying to defend this guy's assertion that there was a racial side to this non event. You will keep putting words here that mean nothing, as if filling space with nonsence will prove your point. It has not. By the way, it's "wins or loses". Al Queda needs a better language class in the mountains of A'stan for you guys.

 

[MalteseX]

Yea, it's only good to sue an employer if you're in the union and you use a union lawyer...cause it's for the greater good, right?

If a pilot was on airline property and was in good standing with a union, they'd have stinking lawyers on this so fast it would make your head spin.

I think a lot of people are either very naive or very two faced.

You are correct .... at least from what I have seen.

I don't know whether it's "good" to sue or not if you are "in" the union. But that is what would happen--provided the guy was off probation. And the union would protect him--but that's because he had a contract and the company would have to "show cause"

But unless this guy was in a "right to work" state, and I don't know if he was.... then the company can simply choose not to hire him; however, if he is able to prove religious discrimination or national origin discrimination, then JB would have to pay up.