Way to go Avantair Pilots!

[myrealnameis]

For Immediate Release July 14, 2011:

Ankle Grabbers Society announces it annual award

Today the American Society of Ankle Grabbers announced that this year’s recipient of the prestigious Ankle Grabber award will be the Avantair Pilot group. Society president Pusillanimous Wussington said in a statement, “Although they faced stiff competition from abroad we are pleased to announce that this year's winner is the Avantair pilot group.” Wussington noted, “Their company dramatically altered the pilots schedules, forcing them to work over 24 more days this year than last, but in true ankle grabber fashion they bent over, took it and did nothing. The Society felt it simply had to acknowledge these pilot's credulity.”

Editors Note: The Ankle Grabber award is a small bronze figurine in the
likeness of a pilot posed in the prone position, firmly grasping his ankles, while
the face gazes furtively upward as though wary of some impending attack.

Only a slacked jawwed faggot like you would know of such award

 

[DC8Driver]

Anyone that doesn't belive pilots don't benefit from a Union are either:

1) Idiots

2) were able to land one of those 1% jobs on something like a G-V with a great company....

3) too young or inexperienced to know any better.....

OR been a member of ALPA and been screwed.........

 

[Paradoxus]

You seem pretty worked up, I think you should relax.

Not at all, thanks. In point of fact, I'm in repose with utter delight with a distraction worthy-enough to leave the sepulchral confines of the N/A chat forum.

Also, what's with the over the top grammar?

Damn. There was a time when a collegiate education was requisite for this line of work, thanks for shattering my delusion that it still sort-of-was.

We've already established you're likely suffering from a wicked level of confusion concerning what is said, what wasn't said, and what was implied.

I suppose it isn't too fantastic of a leap that multisyllabic words fluster you in-kind.

I must confess I'm at a loss on exactly how to counsel you on so dire a shortcoming, except to caution you to remain tight-lipped about it: that the English proficient limitation you carry on your license might have been issued in error.

Do you talk that way?

Yeah.

No wonder you couldn't get a job.

Really now, your little case of dire confusion is now bordering on savage disorientation. No statements, indications, or indeed any evidence was presented on the totally irrelevant issue of my employment status.

As we explore the depths of your now clearly-defined mental perturbation, do tell: do you suffer during training events? Do the sequence of procedures and callouts leave you glassy-eyed and drooling? Do the oft-present "big words" found in aircraft manuals leave you crushed with feelings of abject inadequacy?

Given your well-established thought-flow as evidenced here one can only wonder...

You're wound up tight and speak like you try too hard to sound smart.

Calm yourself, Cletus. You're not doing yourself any favors by sating your ill-conceived convictions concerning "folks who use them big words."

Sorry if my little post rubbed you wrong. It was just funny.

No worries, all in good fun.

And it did exactly what I wanted it to do, it changed the direction of this thread.

It did indeed, and it was genius. What you may not realize, however, is I'm just as content.

Guess I'm the smart one, eh Harvard?

That remains to be seen, though I wouldn't call it just yet: the "smart" ones seldom bitch about "big words."

 

[Paradoxus]

Only a slacked jawwed faggot like you would know of such award

In stark contrast, I suppose not knowing of such award [sic] renders one a goddamed sexual tyrannosaurus, just like you?

 

[wacoflyr]

I just love Flight Info! Where else can one find conversation elevated to such a high level? Seriously, this is good entertainment at the end of the day. Keep it up!

 

[gret]

He thinks he's Keith Olberman. Nobody talks like this way, except some creature in a play by Billy Shakespeare.

Poor taste in the opening post.

"I'm in repose with utter delight with a distraction worthy-enough to leave the sepulchral confines of the N/A chat forum."

You're "utter delight" is probably because you warmed up a piece of liver in the oven and can find your unit with it in your hand.

 

[tomgoodman]

Nobody talks like this way, except some creature in a play by Billy Shakespeare.

Or a wickedly skillful humorist.
I agree with Wacoflyr.

 

[hammer2]

In stark contrast, I suppose not knowing of such award [sic] renders one a goddamed sexual tyrannosaurus, just like you?

Hey Paradoxus, what's with the interest in Avantair?
From what I've heard, the have been sodomized...repeatedly!

 

[The Dude Abides]

Only a slacked jawwed faggot like you would know of such award

Ummmm . . . any Mods out there?

 

[gutshotdraw]

Ummmm . . . any Mods out there?

Naw, they're over in the majors section breaking up the latest SWA-AirTran SLI fistfight.....








Kidding mods, kidding.

 

[G4dude]

Very well-said. Most of the types you've called attention to are abject fools, losers whom having failed themselves feel a sense of unqualified devotion to any employers that give them a chance, so to speak.

Perhaps most tragic of all: the afore-mentioned unqualified devotion results in a sort of divorcing from reality; brought upon by self-reinforced marginalization of self-worth, causing them to emulate the savage temperament of management with relation to pilot labor.

You've heard it before, I'm sure: "...pilots are whiners who don't really work for a living...pilots are not skilled professionals, analogous to common field workers..." and so forth.

With this form of Stockholm Syndrome, as inevitable as it is grim, comes the requisite throwing of fellow pilots under the bus.

I've yet to hear a reasonable argument against pilot organization and representation in universalis.

Let me take a stab at it. Unions make a company less competitive by raising the cost of labor. Unions also protect the worst pilots, thereby debauching the pilot pool. Also, Union pilots call in sick a lot more, cancel trips more, and are generally more sullen and less productive. Eventually, Unions eat their most company in many cases, rendering unemployed the very pilots the Unions were supposed to be helping. I belong to a Union, and I see what the dynamics are. With all due respect to Union fans everywhere.

 

[fischman]

Let me take a stab at it. Unions make a company less competitive by raising the cost of labor. Unions also protect the worst pilots, thereby debauching the pilot pool. Also, Union pilots call in sick a lot more, cancel trips more, and are generally more sullen and less productive. Eventually, Unions eat their most company in many cases, rendering unemployed the very pilots the Unions were supposed to be helping. I belong to a Union, and I see what the dynamics are. With all due respect to Union fans everywhere.

Unions also protect its members from "ready, fire, aim" management. They do not feel pressured to fly sick, tired, or in any unsafe condition with a fear of discipline.

Which is better? Canceling a trip due to unsafe conditions (scheduling ring a bell?), or taking that passenger no matter what?

Safety is ALWAYS paramount, and I caution you on your response. Anything you return with is an argument AGAINST a safe operation!

 

[glasspilot]

Safety is ALWAYS paramount, and I caution you on your response. Anything you return with is an argument AGAINST a safe operation!

That sounds like a challange! I'll jump on that...why not?
I'll do my usual thing, I'll say something extreme and then make the point...

Safety is NOT paramount. I'll say that again...Safety is not paramount. It's not number one or top priority either. It's not at any company in America either, especially any company that flies airplanes including, your NetJets fischman.

Don't believe me? I can prove it. If safety was indeed the most important thing at any of our companies then none of us would ever take off in an airplane or allow any employees to drive a car. Both of those activities can be fatal.

The fact is everything in life carries some risk and what we do carries more that most activities. It can be argued that we do a dis-service to safety by overselling it. Every company claims safety as job one but what does that even mean? We don't do anything that's at all unsafe?

No, we all do things inherently unsafe, but we do our best to mitigate that risk. Fatigue calls have been a topic of late. The real issue is how much is acceptable risk. Not the black and white of fatigued or not. The reason is that from the minute you wake up you start to get more and more fatigued. Where's the line? Doesn't "risk management" better address the issue than "safety". Fatigue isn't a digital thing that either is or isn't. It's an analog thing that progresses. Trying to draw a line is difficult at best. Many say any fatigue is too much! Okay, but go back to my point that from the moment you wake up you start to be less and less rested. Again, it's an analog not digital thing.

Same can be applied to everything we do from checklists to approaches to fueling to taxi. Blindly shouting "safety is our top priority" doesn't really mean anything.

Eh, it's an idea anyway...read it in some article and seemed to make sense.

 

[fischman]

Semantics.

 

[wacoflyr]

A one word answer to that? That's just lazy.

 

[X-rated]

Semantics.

What was semantics? The definition of safety?

Safety is ALWAYS paramount, and I caution you on your response. Anything you return with is an argument AGAINST a safe operation!

Glass posted literally word for word what I would have had he not. Cramming human beings into a metal tube and propelling them high in the air at high rates of speed is inherently unsafe. Most pilots believe the hazard can be reasonably mitigated by many factors including technology, training, cautiousness, and good judgment. Somehow you always seem to think your judgement is better than ours, and anyone who takes a contrary view is therefore against safe operation. The reality is it is you who constantly abuse the premise of safety to promote your personal agenda which I firmly believe does nothing but diminish the true safety environment.

If you really believe "safety is ALWAYS paramount" I suggest you park your airplane and buy your passengers a bus ticket. And, I caution you on your response. Anything you return with is an augment AGAINST safe operation!

 

[learflyer]

A one word answer to that? That's just lazy.

That's because Glasss won the argument..

 

[fischman]

What was semantics? The definition of safety?




Glass posted literally word for word what I would have had he not. Cramming human beings into a metal tube and propelling them high in the air at high rates of speed is inherently unsafe. Most pilots believe the hazard can be reasonably mitigated by many factors including technology, training, cautiousness, and good judgment. Somehow you always seem to think your judgement is better than ours, and anyone who takes a contrary view is therefore against safe operation. The reality is it is you who constantly abuse the premise of safety to promote your personal agenda which I firmly believe does nothing but diminish the true safety environment.

If you really believe "safety is ALWAYS paramount" I suggest you park your airplane and buy your passengers a bus ticket. And, I caution you on your response. Anything you return with is an augment AGAINST safe operation!

You know that the most dangerous part of our job is the ride to and from the airport. Taking a bus would be more dangerous than flying.

To insinuate that I abuse our fatigue policy is insulting. I use it as necessary. Nothing more.

I say it is semantics because it was. We are all professionals here, and seeing as we are all here reading this, it is safe to say that we are all good at it.

My judgement being better is a no brainer. I am awesome. Perhaps you haven't heard?

Safety is foremost on my mind every second at work. Is it not the case with everyone else?!? YIKES!!!

 

[1folinepilot]

Aww, let it go. The guy who started this thread works for flops, and is therefore one of the most downtrodden pilots in history. Even with a union, they make less than we do. Let the poor guy rant.

Ah but now he gets to eat 300$ lobster dinners while on the road. That was one of the few good points of the contract.

Since none of the pilots received a 401K match and most didn't get the raise he promised, at least they get some food while on the road.

 

[aflyboy]

We have a buffer against this. It's our PAC. We elected these guys (and lady) to keep an eye on our best interests, without putting a stranglehold on management that might keep them from making key decision(s). They've done a great job in the past, we trust that the new roster will do the same.

You are a f***ing idiot. Your PAC, as has been proven time and time again, is nothing more than a management inspired pacifier that fools like you suck on, when not on your knees sucking on some part of a management flunky's anatomy. The PAC not has NOT done a great job in the past. The record reflect it has done NO job in the past. They are a joke. That has been amply proven over and over again. Management constantly makes empty promises, the PAC buys into their BS and makes the same empty promises and empty headed idiots like you lap it up like warm milk. Me thinks you are too stupid to converse with.

Bye for now.