SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
jtrain609 said:EDIT: Nevermind, not worth my time.
That's okay, John. I saw it before you deleted it. I'll send you an email when I have time later.
jtrain609 said:EDIT: Nevermind, not worth my time.
Yes I see the bigger picture. Problem it is hard to explain to the younger new hires.Autothrust Blue said:And I would assume that you can see the Big Picture™ and voted no as well...
ComplexHiAv8r said:Yes I see the bigger picture. Problem it is hard to explain to the younger new hires.
Not allowing someone to vote, isn't that unAmerican?
View attachment 31242
But seriously, why shouldn't new pilots at a non-Union shop not be allowed to vote?
Voter disenfranchisement is probably one of the most American things you can do. Especially if you're rich and white.Not allowing someone to vote, isn't that unAmerican?
View attachment 31242
But seriously, why shouldn't new pilots at a non-Union shop not be allowed to vote?
IOW, you voted no.Yes I see the bigger picture. Problem it is hard to explain to the younger new hires.
I care about this answer.EDIT: Nevermind, not worth my time.
Voter disenfranchisement is probably one of the most American things you can do. Especially if you're rich and white.
Wait, wait, I've seen this, on Newsnight with Will McAvoy!This is hilarious, but highly accurate- you forgot to add male to that list too.
I'd like to hear it too @jtrain609Autothrust Blue said:I care about this answer.
EDIT: Nevermind, not worth my time.
STFDI'll be voting ALPA.
I had the distinct privilege of explaining my vote to the VP of Flight Operations today. As it turns out, it was Captains Peterson and Jacobie and NOT the Company that decided FOs contributions to profitability were worth 70% of a Captain's contribution. Thanks, guys.LOA 72 sealed the deal for me and I voted no!
I don't get the vitriol regarding that. IF you view the PPS as part of pay, then it makes sense to divide it up as it is, with more to CAs than FOs. If, however, you view the PPS as a bonus program that shouldn't even be discussed when it comes to a pay package, as I do, then it doesn't. So really, the argument should be whether or not a variable PPS constitutes pay/a raise and should even be on the table, not how it's divided up.I had the distinct privilege of explaining my vote to the VP of Flight Operations today. As it turns out, it was Captains Peterson and Jacobie and NOT the Company that decided FOs contributions to profitability were worth 70% of a Captain's contribution. Thanks, guys.
On this one, yes.Should everyone be paid the same?
I don't consider it pay.I don't get the vitriol regarding that. IF you view the PPS as part of pay, then it makes sense to divide it up as it is, with more to CAs than FOs. If, however, you view the PPS as a bonus program that shouldn't even be discussed when it comes to a pay package, as I do, then it doesn't. So really, the argument should be whether or not a variable PPS constitutes pay/a raise and should even be on the table, not how it's divided up.
On this one, yes.
Should everyone be paid the same?