NATCA Going Down in Flames

Emily wrote:
Jose wrote:
Fly out of ADS. Drive is about twenty minutes. Taxi...well, with
one runway and mostly jet traffic, taxi is really quick.

Just north of ADS is F69.

Dallas Air Park is a private neighborhood, they do not have planes for
rent.

Can someone remind me of what issue we are trying to solve in this
thread? Emily, are you actually looking for a non-controlled field in
the Dallas/Ft. Worth area that has rentals? And that is within your
restrictive criteria of driving times from near KDFW? And what are the
other criteria? And are you really looking for a solution or just trying
to make some type of point?

Emily wrote:

Grumman-581 wrote:
"Ron Lee" wrote in message
...
Now if I could get a female stalker, 5'7" or less, trim, brunette or
blonde, active, adventurous, no kids. Stalking must be innocuous and
not symptomatic of any psychoses (sp). Need not be a pilot but that
is a plus.

And looking for someone to fill her hangar? dirty-old-man-grin


Pervs.

Unfortunately, I fit his description. Maybe that could be a new hobby.

I think that was a slam at me Emily.

Or are you calling yourself a perv? I can't tell which post you are
replying to.

Ron Lee

Bruce Riggs wrote:
Emily wrote:
Jose wrote:
Fly out of ADS. Drive is about twenty minutes. Taxi...well, with
one runway and mostly jet traffic, taxi is really quick.

Just north of ADS is F69.

Dallas Air Park is a private neighborhood, they do not have planes for
rent.

Can someone remind me of what issue we are trying to solve in this
thread? Emily, are you actually looking for a non-controlled field in
the Dallas/Ft. Worth area that has rentals? And that is within your
restrictive criteria of driving times from near KDFW? And what are the
other criteria? And are you really looking for a solution or just trying
to make some type of point?

I made my point long ago. I'm perfectly happy flying out of ADS.

Ron Lee wrote:
Emily wrote:

Grumman-581 wrote:
"Ron Lee" wrote in message
...
Now if I could get a female stalker, 5'7" or less, trim, brunette or
blonde, active, adventurous, no kids. Stalking must be innocuous and
not symptomatic of any psychoses (sp). Need not be a pilot but that
is a plus.
And looking for someone to fill her hangar? dirty-old-man-grin


Pervs.

Unfortunately, I fit his description. Maybe that could be a new hobby.

I think that was a slam at me Emily.

Or are you calling yourself a perv? I can't tell which post you are
replying to.

Ron Lee

lol

Was a slam at both of you, but mostly Grumman.

Kind of seems like a profession where there is only one employer... Does
your run of the mill controller really have any other job opportunities?
I
suspect that senior management would have other opportunities in that they
can shuffle papers just about anywhere, but what about the guys who are
actually doing the work?


There are non federal control towers. There are also other professions, ever
heard of cross training?

BT

Emily wrote:
Ron Lee wrote:

This is ridiculous that a union is opposed to casual attire (slack &
collard shirts). I did not read suits.

Sounds like NATCA needs to be Reaganed.

Ron Lee


As a woman, I think the collared shirt thing is ridiculous. So many
people feel to comprehend that women can be business casual without a
collar.

But I agree that the union needs to find something else to oppose. A
huge reason why I'm so glad we don't have unions here.
Think skirts instead of collared shirts for the female version.

Margy

I made my point long ago. I'm perfectly happy flying out of ADS.

Her point is that it's "too much trouble" to fly out of the DFW area
NORDO. I suppose the threshhold of "too much trouble" varies from pilot
to pilot; the thread has gone to how much trouble is "too much". (Even
Jay would find some amount of trouble to be "too much").

IIRC, the thread's divergance started with the suggestion that ATC would
charge for services, and pilots would simply, and easily, avoid ATC.

Well, yes and no.

Jose
--
There are more ways to skin a cat than there are cats.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

On Wed, 06 Sep 2006 23:57:46 GMT, "Dave Stadt"
wrote in :


"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 6 Sep 2006 11:46:27 -0400, "John T" wrote in
:


Nothing in the original post suggests to me anybody has denied any "right"
to bargain (if any such "right" exists).

Normally (not federal employees apparently), if an employer changes
job requirements, it opens the contract for renegotiation. To demand
the employee meet the new requirements without voicing acceptance
seems like abuse to me.

Sems to me you know little to nothing about employment laws.


Does that mean you want to cite one?

Jose wrote:

IIRC, the thread's divergance started with the suggestion that ATC would
charge for services, and pilots would simply, and easily, avoid ATC.

Well, yes and no.

Yes for some like me; no for some like Emily.

Ron Lee

Your employees know, when hired, what the dress code is. How do you
think they would feel if today you went to work and informed them that
from now on they would wear black-tie to work everyday. I bet you would
have a few very unhappy folks.

Sure. So what?

As owner, I have a duty to run our business in the way I see best. If
it looks to me like our current dress code isn't working, and the new
government-built Marriott down the road is kicking our butt by dressing
their desk staff in bib overalls, well, I'll probably institute a
mandatory bib-overalls-dress code.

And, if the FAA thinks their operations are more professional by
requiring a minimum dress code from their employees, so be it.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"