Oops...stuck mic houston center

Rocketman99 said:
The hell he doesn't! There is no time/place/universe where suddenly someone is not entitled to an opinion. Doesn't matter if it's right or wrong. I'm very surprised to see what side of this debate you are on Todd. IMO the most the bad luck captain in this incident should have gotten was a nice little be more careful when you open your mouth letter in his file. Seems to me most people in society today need to toughen up and quit looking for reasons to get offended about everything.
Click to expand...

A-Frackin-men!
 
RightSeatGirl said:
First of all you are dead wrong, the use of certain terms can have a wide variety of intent and meaning. Inflection, actual intended definition, physical mannerism all play into the intent of communication. Your opinions are far too absolute. I think you have a great deal to learn about people. Just because you don't like, as your example showed, the "n" word, doesn't mean every one else is offended by it. Doesn't seem to bother black people that use the word as a term of endearment now does it?

I listened to the tape, read the transcript. He used words like "homosexual", "gays", "grannys"..I didn't hear or read "•", "queer", "dyke", if I missed it please point it out. Though that might change my opinion of this man's intelligence, it would change nothing else on my position....I am gay, and what he said didn't offend me, mostly because I don't care about the ramblings of idiots..Personally I think the guy was complaining because there weren't enough young attractive straight chicks for him to pounce on.
Click to expand...

Wasn't there an "I dont care, I hate them all" in the transcript somewhere?
 
RightSeatGirl said:
Doesn't seem to bother black people that use the word as a term of endearment now does it?
Click to expand...

There was nothing "endearing" about what this guy had to say.

I listened to the tape, read the transcript. He used words like "homosexual", "gays", "grannys"..I didn't hear or read "•", "queer", "dyke", if I missed it please point it out.
Click to expand...

You're wrong. The Huffington Post has the full audio linked without any bleeps. Here it is: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/24/southwest-pilot-gay-rant_n_883841.html

He clearly uses the word "•" and states matter of factly, "I hate all of them."

Rocketman99 said:
I'm very surprised to see what side of this debate you are on Todd.
Click to expand...

You shouldn't be. I have zero tolerance for bigotry in the work place.
 
I don't remember seeing that, but perhaps there was ( I probably self "bleeped" it out because I just don't care...AGAIN, about the ramblings of morons), still changes nothing with the meat of my position. You have to take the good with the bad in a "free" society..If that is not good enough for an individual than may I point out Cuba is a mere 90 mile swim from Southern Florida and they probably need comrade..*ahem* I mean pilots too...

I would never want to live in a country where people no longer have the right to idiotic opinions. The day we open that can of worms is the day freedom starts to die.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
You shouldn't be. I have zero tolerance for bigotry in the work place.
Click to expand...

I dunno man, considering the FO didn't seem to take issue with it and it wasn't intended to become public domain (or even reasonably expected to be) that's pushing the boundaries. Getting close to trying to be the thought police or maybe pre-crime ala Minority Report. When you start acting out on any of this sort of stuff is where the problem is, vomiting out your mouth is not so much so.
 
We have free speech. That means the GOVERNMENT can not do anything about what we say. If I were to start in like this guy did at any office in America I would be fired so fast that the HR people wouldn't even have time to process my termination paperwork.

Also, the FO is not a peer, not an equal. He is directly subordinate to the Captain, and may feel uncomfortable voicing his opinion on the subject.
 
RightSeatGirl said:
I listened to the tape, read the transcript. He used words like "homosexual", "gays", "grannys"..I didn't hear or read "•", "queer", "dyke", if I missed it please point it out. Though that might change my opinion of this man's intelligence, it would change nothing else on my position....I am gay, and what he said didn't offend me, mostly because I don't care about the ramblings of idiots..Personally I think the guy was complaining because there weren't enough young attractive straight chicks for him to pounce on and nothing else really mattered...In itself that's sad, but a different issue entirely.
Click to expand...

He dropped a "•" in there at least once or twice. They may have redacted it from the transcript but it's in the recording.

Edit: Looks like I was too slow. :)
 
SpiraMirabilis said:
Also, the FO is not a peer, not an equal. He is directly subordinate to the Captain, and may feel uncomfortable voicing his opinion on the subject.
Click to expand...

So had this coversation never gone out on the airways, yet still occurred in-cockpit, should the FO have reported it if he didn't like it? And if he didn't, is he just as culpable for passively taking part in the conversations; or even tacitly approving of them by saying nothing either way?

Since the common theme here seems to be wanting to drag this Capt out to be be shot at sundown........
 
RightSeatGirl said:
You have to take the good with the bad in a "free" society..If that is not good enough for an individual than may I point out Cuba is a mere 90 mile swim from Southern Florida and they probably need comrade..*ahem* I mean pilots too...

I would never want to live in a country where people no longer have the right to idiotic opinions. The day we open that can of worms is the day freedom starts to die.
Click to expand...

Like most teabaggers, you seem to have difficulty understanding that a private corporation limiting the rights of its employees on company time is not a violation of your freedom.

Rocketman99 said:
I dunno man, considering the FO didn't seem to take issue with it and it wasn't intended to become public domain (or even reasonably expected to be) that's pushing the boundaries. Getting close to trying to be the thought police or maybe pre-crime ala Minority Report. When you start acting out on any of this sort of stuff is where the problem is, vomiting out your mouth is not so much so.
Click to expand...

But what if the FO did have a problem with it? Is he now placed in the position of having to tell this guy who is basically his boss for the next few days "hey, I really don't feel comfortable with you saying that stuff?" He shouldn't be placed in that position, because the captain should never say such things at work.

SpiraMirabilis said:
Also, the FO is not a peer, not an equal. He is directly subordinate to the Captain, and may feel uncomfortable voicing his opinion on the subject.
Click to expand...

Bingo!
 
Disclaimer: I haven't read through all 5 pages of this thread so pardon me if this has been brought up already but...

Doesn't SWA have a "sterile cockpit" rule? No personal chatter below 10,000 (or something similar)? If this had happened at AMR the pilot would be the hotseat for violation of sterile cockpit as well as creating a hostile work environment. Everyone is entitled to their opinions, however a rant like that has no place in the cockpit as the other pilot is a captive audience. There's no escape for the other guy, he HAS to sit there, and do you think that other pilot may be inclined to just quietly sit there and try to ignore it if he disagrees instead of getting into a discussion along those lines? Creating even more of a distracted atmosphere? If the pilot had said the exact same things at a restaurant or bar on the overnight, that's a WHOLE different scenario. No sterile cockpit, no captive audience (the other person is free to leave), and they're not on duty at all.

So, opinion, yes, we're all entitled to our opinions, but that doesn't mean we're necessarily free to just spout off and say whatever we want whenever we want. It's called using discretion, and a rant like that just doesn't need to be verbally expressed at that particular moment in time.
 
MikeD said:
So had this coversation never gone out on the airways, yet still occurred in-cockpit, should the FO have reported it if he didn't like it? And if he didn't, is he just as culpable for passively taking part in the conversations; or even tacitly approving of them by saying nothing either way?
Click to expand...

I've run into this several times as an FO, and I've always just said "hey, that crap isn't appropriate." That has always gotten them to shut up. If it wouldn't, though, I'd probably bypass pro standards and go straight to HR. Racism and bigotry is a bit different than the normal pro standards stuff.
 
Teabagger? Oh brother...you are lost aren't you...So, let me get this straight, you are an advocate of corporate "rights" trumping the Constitution? Man.....Someone get this kid a beer.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
But what if the FO did have a problem with it? Is he now placed in the position of having to tell this guy who is basically his boss for the next few days "hey, I really don't feel comfortable with you saying that stuff?" He shouldn't be placed in that position, because the captain should never say such things at work.
Click to expand...

Silence is tacit approval. I've heard far worse in the cockpit in both the airlines and the military. If I didn't like what I heard, I spoke up.

Hmm...Friday night, need to go out and have a beer. I imagine this thread will only have improved when I get back later tonight. :)
 
MikeD said:
So had this coversation never gone out on the airways, yet still occurred in-cockpit, should the FO have reported it if he didn't like it? And if he didn't, is he just as culpable for passively taking part in the conversations; or even tacitly approving of them by saying nothing either way?

Since the common theme here seems to be wanting to drag this Capt out to be be shot at sundown........
Click to expand...
Nah, that's now how I would roll. But I might do something passive aggressive like accidently hold down the PTT on the cabin mic open while he is in the middle of his rant... wait, maybe that is what happened? ;) Actually, I wouldn't do that either but I would laugh if that was what happened.

They were talking to Center still so it was unlikely they were below 10k.
 
Doug Taylor said:
See, I didn't laugh at him because there are those that have and those that will again!
Click to expand...

Yes! That's the truth!

Doug Taylor said:
My freshman year at Southernjets, we jumped onto a 727 and I was testing the oxygen mask microphone. I tested the oxygen and then the mic by saying "POOOOSH Luke... I am your far tha!" over the PA.

Little did I realize that it was a "through flight" and there were about 30 passengers onboard. Most laughed, but a little old lady looked like she was about to have a myocardial infarction.
Click to expand...

Ha! I got you beat!

When I was a new-hire at Southernjets I had just left USAir after spending 3 years there. On my first revenue Southernjets flight as a B-727 Second-Officer I made the top of cruise PA and said "USAir" every time I should have said "Southernjets." I heard the A-line clumping up the aisle and knocking on the cockpit door - "Did you just say USAir Flt XXX?"

Whoops!

I had to get on the PA and 'splain myself...

The Captain & F/O laughed at me...



Kevin
 
RightSeatGirl said:
Teabagger? Oh brother...you are lost aren't you...So, let me get this straight, you are an advocate of corporate "rights" trumping the Constitution? Man.....Someone get this kid a beer.
Click to expand...
I like you RSG but the Constitution protects what the government can do to you. "Congress shall make no law" being the appropriate lines.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
I've run into this several times as an FO, and I've always just said "hey, that crap isn't appropriate." That has always gotten them to shut up. If it wouldn't, though, I'd probably bypass pro standards and go straight to HR. Racism and bigotry is a bit different than the normal pro standards stuff.
Click to expand...

Agree. You made your wishes known then and there......handled at the lowest level: in the cockpit.

In this case though, the only difference is that the guy got caught due to it going out over the air. For anyone that wants this guy fried, all thats going to cause management to do is work to require people to report anything and everything they deem offensive for the appropriate disciplinary action. And to insure that crews are complying, CVR audits will occur, and anyone who doesn't report a situation is just as guilty as the person who committed the crime, and both will be disciplined; in this case the FO too.

Thats where frying this guy will lead. Should he get away scott free? No. He got bit by bad luck and, well, life's a bitch sometimes and not fair. It appears SWA provided punishment to their satisfaction and the situation is past. That should be all that matters. We just go down a slippery slope if we start this direction it appears some are headed down.
 
Let me put it to you this way. The cockpit is a work environment. 47 years ago (so the argument that 40 years ago people would have dealt with it differently doesn't hold true) it became illegal to create a hostile work environment based on discriminatory intent. Three years later that was extended to people over the age of 40. Later that was extended to people with disabilities. So, he dissed women (sorry, gays are not "protected" under federal law--write your Congress people to do SOMETHING while in office), and women of size (who under the ADAAA could be considered people with a disability). I'm sure WN did an investigation and found that this was not the first conversation he had. Thus, they moved to suspend him and give him diversity training. However, I'm also sure, that if there is another peep out of him, he's toast.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top