clansinclair
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2004
- Posts
- 53
Just so you know, I have "sacked up" and let management know how I feel about more than a few things. In fact, I'd like to know when all the rest of my fellow USAJ pilots are going to "sack up" at the business meetings and pilot meetings, speak their minds, and let management know a few things, instead of getting on this web site in anonymity, and crying like a bunch of little girls!
As far as your question, probably none of the managers have had to do what I've done to make ends meet. They probably make more than I do, manage their money better, and probably do many things different than I do. Which probably explains why they're management and I'm not. So, what's your point? Are you trying to imply that the owners, investors, and management do not share the "downside" equitably when the business is slow? If so, what data do you base your premise on? Furthermore, just to play "devils advocate", why should they share the downside equitably? Compare your risk/investment ratio to theirs, and see if you can justify logically your premise.
I use to own my own business, and I can recall a few times when my family and I went without paying ourselves just to make payroll. That's one of many reasons I don't ever want to own my own business again, that is unless I somehow become filthy rich and can afford to lose a few hundred thousand dollars at a time to be able to "cash in" on the big bucks when the business cycles really payoff.
It never ceases to amaze me how all you "broke-dick" geniuses think that all those "management types" are smart enough to accumulate their "wealth", but aren't smart enough to manage it. Can you explain that one to me? As I've said before, if you got all the answers, go start your own company and treat your employees just like you think our employers should treat us.
Now, I think it's healthy to debate constructively the merits of differing philosophies, management styles, business decisions, etc., but in the end you've got to remember "the golden rule". The guy with the gold makes the rules, and as long as we stay addicted to flying and willing to cut each others' throat for a job, the owners/managers are going to continue to have an edge on us. The principle of supply and demand will dictate our wages, QOL, working conditions, etc.
I just think it's more constructive to work within the system and with management, than it is to create a unionized institution that is counter-productive, inefficient, and un-profitable. Unless a union can do the things I spoke of in my previous posting, I personally have no interest in starting one at USAJ. I'm not trying to say that I'm right and you're wrong. I'm just stating my position and why I feel the way I do, that's all.
As far as your question, probably none of the managers have had to do what I've done to make ends meet. They probably make more than I do, manage their money better, and probably do many things different than I do. Which probably explains why they're management and I'm not. So, what's your point? Are you trying to imply that the owners, investors, and management do not share the "downside" equitably when the business is slow? If so, what data do you base your premise on? Furthermore, just to play "devils advocate", why should they share the downside equitably? Compare your risk/investment ratio to theirs, and see if you can justify logically your premise.
I use to own my own business, and I can recall a few times when my family and I went without paying ourselves just to make payroll. That's one of many reasons I don't ever want to own my own business again, that is unless I somehow become filthy rich and can afford to lose a few hundred thousand dollars at a time to be able to "cash in" on the big bucks when the business cycles really payoff.
It never ceases to amaze me how all you "broke-dick" geniuses think that all those "management types" are smart enough to accumulate their "wealth", but aren't smart enough to manage it. Can you explain that one to me? As I've said before, if you got all the answers, go start your own company and treat your employees just like you think our employers should treat us.
Now, I think it's healthy to debate constructively the merits of differing philosophies, management styles, business decisions, etc., but in the end you've got to remember "the golden rule". The guy with the gold makes the rules, and as long as we stay addicted to flying and willing to cut each others' throat for a job, the owners/managers are going to continue to have an edge on us. The principle of supply and demand will dictate our wages, QOL, working conditions, etc.
I just think it's more constructive to work within the system and with management, than it is to create a unionized institution that is counter-productive, inefficient, and un-profitable. Unless a union can do the things I spoke of in my previous posting, I personally have no interest in starting one at USAJ. I'm not trying to say that I'm right and you're wrong. I'm just stating my position and why I feel the way I do, that's all.
