A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

NATCA Going Down in Flames



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 5th 06, 05:17 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Dave Stadt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 271
Default NATCA Going Down in Flames


"Private" wrote in message
news:n76Lg.516413$IK3.107547@pd7tw1no...

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
oups.com...

In the end, the point isn't what I like, or what you like -- it's what
the employer likes. If the FAA decides that it wants you to wear polka
dot clown suits every day, so be it.


I will wear whatever my employer wishes, provided they also provide it.


In that case you quite likely would find yourself pursuing other
opportunities.

Happy landings.



  #2  
Old September 5th 06, 03:10 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Matt Barrow
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 603
Default NATCA Going Down in Flames


"Dave Stadt" wrote in message
om...

"Private" wrote in message
news:n76Lg.516413$IK3.107547@pd7tw1no...

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
oups.com...

In the end, the point isn't what I like, or what you like -- it's what
the employer likes. If the FAA decides that it wants you to wear polka
dot clown suits every day, so be it.


I will wear whatever my employer wishes, provided they also provide it.


In that case you quite likely would find yourself pursuing other
opportunities.

I require my project managers to wear slacks and at least a "golf" type
shirt when meeting clients/contractors in their offices. When entertaining
them in a restaurant, for example, a suit/sport coat and tie are mandatory.

I haven't had to buy anyone a suit yet, and I doubt I ever will.



  #3  
Old September 6th 06, 07:17 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Private
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 188
Default NATCA Going Down in Flames


"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

"Dave Stadt" wrote in message
om...

"Private" wrote in message
news:n76Lg.516413$IK3.107547@pd7tw1no...

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
oups.com...

In the end, the point isn't what I like, or what you like -- it's what
the employer likes. If the FAA decides that it wants you to wear polka
dot clown suits every day, so be it.

I will wear whatever my employer wishes, provided they also provide it.


In that case you quite likely would find yourself pursuing other
opportunities.

I require my project managers to wear slacks and at least a "golf" type
shirt when meeting clients/contractors in their offices. When entertaining
them in a restaurant, for example, a suit/sport coat and tie are
mandatory.

I haven't had to buy anyone a suit yet, and I doubt I ever will.


There are laws that determine minimum acceptable dress in public places.
For many and varied purposes many employers choose to exceed these minimum
requirements. Military, police and other organizations have many obvious
needs for identification and public image. Many other workplaces have
demands for specialized dress due to health and safety reasons. The costs
for this special dress are properly those of the enterprise that requires
them and because of this IMHE most employers are required to provide safety
equipment like high vis coveralls and hard hats and gloves. Because these
expenses are deductible they represent a LOWER cost to the employer than
requiring the employee to provide these items and pay for them in after tax
dollars. The employer usually sees this an opportunity to improve their
public image by putting their company name and image on these safety items.
Many employers provide allowances to cover the cost of personal safety
footwear that is not returned to the employer at the end of a job. Many
employers discover that their net costs go down due to lowered injury rates
and costs and the increased quality of their image is easy to justify as
perhaps the cheapest advertising they will ever buy.

The case can and is usually made that flip flops are a safety issue.
Similarly, cut offs or clothing that has wear holes or tears is also either
a health or safety issue due to flammability or sun exposure or that it may
cause damage to the employers equipment. What you wear under the company
coveralls is seldom a concern of the employer. Similarly rings and jewelry
can usually be considered safety issues.

The bottom line is that this is a matter that can normally be resolved by
reference to legislation or cooperation in good faith between employer and
employee. Most employees recognize that what is good for the employer is
usually also in their own best interest.

The real problem arises when the clothing has religious significance and
this is a real minefield where the employee may have RIGHTS.that make the
employers wishes unlawful or discriminatory. We have not even mentioned the
possibility of free speech issues created by t shirts with inappropriate
messages. Most employers are REQUIRED to provide and require the use of
needed safety and health items. An employer has great latitude and can
probably justify and require the use of supplied uniforms and safety
equipment on safety or health grounds and they usually find that the cost of
company coveralls or a company golf shirt to be a much smaller cost than
trying to demand employees purchase approved clothing.

IMHO disputes that arise from appearance issues are more likely due to a
breakdown in relations in some other area and that the inappropriate
clothing is more of a symptom than a problem issue to be treated in
isolation. The smart employer avoids a HR ****ing contest as they are
seldom productive or helpful in the long term.

Just my .02


  #4  
Old September 9th 06, 02:14 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Roger (K8RI)
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 727
Default NATCA Going Down in Flames

On Tue, 5 Sep 2006 07:10:29 -0700, "Matt Barrow"
wrote:


"Dave Stadt" wrote in message
. com...

"Private" wrote in message
news:n76Lg.516413$IK3.107547@pd7tw1no...

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
oups.com...

In the end, the point isn't what I like, or what you like -- it's what
the employer likes. If the FAA decides that it wants you to wear polka
dot clown suits every day, so be it.

I will wear whatever my employer wishes, provided they also provide it.


In that case you quite likely would find yourself pursuing other
opportunities.

I require my project managers to wear slacks and at least a "golf" type
shirt when meeting clients/contractors in their offices. When entertaining
them in a restaurant, for example, a suit/sport coat and tie are mandatory.

I haven't had to buy anyone a suit yet, and I doubt I ever will.


I was a project manager in the CS department for a large multinational
corporation. The only time I ever wore a suit was at my interview.
After that I wore what I do now; slacks and a good shirt albeit I
could wear fitted shirts then. I guess I could now too, but they'd
have to let the middle out instead of taking it in.:-))
When they had a business lunch I wore the same thing and I had
one rule. I either did business or ate lunch but never both at the
same time. It's not good for the digestion.
As long as the person takes proper care of their personal sanitation
(you don't have to open the windows when they walk in a room of turn
away when they smile) I don't care what they ware. The co-ops that
were sent home for *almost* wearing a skirt too short should have been
in our departments instead of the office areas. They probably would
have still been sent home but it would have been because the guys
weren't getting any work done.

OTOH I view restaurants and hotels as a different world than computer
geeks and Air Traffic Controllers. Even then you are only talking
about neat, clean, and wearing the company logo. As far as name tags,
since I was 21 I've never worked any where that didn't require a
security badge.

I also had a job where I did wear a work uniform if you want to call
it that. I worked in industrial instrumentation for 26 years before
going back to college and I was glad they not only provided the slacks
and monogrammed shirts, coats, jackets, and even coveralls, but did
the laundry. It was not exactly an environment that was friendly to
what you wore. We all gladly put our personal clothes in our lockers.




Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
  #5  
Old September 9th 06, 02:40 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Jose[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,632
Default NATCA Going Down in Flames

The co-ops that
were sent home for *almost* wearing a skirt too short should have been
in our departments instead of the office areas.


If they "almost" wore a skirt, what =did= they wear? (or should we not
go there?

Jose
--
There are more ways to skin a cat than there are cats.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.
  #6  
Old September 9th 06, 06:51 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Roger (K8RI)
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 727
Default NATCA Going Down in Flames

On Sat, 09 Sep 2006 01:40:46 GMT, Jose
wrote:

The co-ops that
were sent home for *almost* wearing a skirt too short should have been
in our departments instead of the office areas.


If they "almost" wore a skirt, what =did= they wear? (or should we not
go there?

So you really are an attentive reader:-))
Havent your seen one of those skirts that are low on top and high on
the bottom?


Jose

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
  #7  
Old September 9th 06, 03:40 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Jose[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,632
Default NATCA Going Down in Flames

Havent your seen one of those skirts that are low on top and high on
the bottom?


With the coin slot? Yeah, I saw one in Pasadena. I guess that counts
as "almost wearing" it.

Jose
--
There are more ways to skin a cat than there are cats.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.
  #8  
Old September 9th 06, 04:07 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Matt Barrow
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 603
Default NATCA Going Down in Flames


"Roger (K8RI)" wrote in message
...
OTOH I view restaurants and hotels as a different world than computer
geeks and Air Traffic Controllers.


True. One group meets the public and another doesn't...normally.

I do notice, in my thirty some years in the business/engineering something
of a relationship from dress (call it comportment) to attitude, to

I laugh when I hear the term "Software Engineer". Slop shop is what I've
seen.

There's casual, as appropriate, and there grunge...especially when adults
are acting like spoiled brats. (See remarks about IT in Asia; those who
thought IT was a company provided playground).



  #9  
Old September 9th 06, 04:16 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Jose[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,632
Default NATCA Going Down in Flames

I laugh when I hear the term "Software Engineer". Slop shop is what I've
seen.


There is sloppy code and sloppy dress. Can you demonstrate a positive
correlation between them?

Jose
--
There are more ways to skin a cat than there are cats.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.
  #10  
Old September 9th 06, 06:57 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 316
Default NATCA Going Down in Flames

Yup.. These are the same people who wrote software that have us
clicking on "start" to turn off our computers,,, They comment how they
make as much if not more the ATC workers. Money doesn't seem to weed
out the bizarre so it must be the clothes they wear.....

Ducking and running.

Ben.
Jose wrote:
I laugh when I hear the term "Software Engineer". Slop shop is what I've
seen.


There is sloppy code and sloppy dress. Can you demonstrate a positive
correlation between them?

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


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
An ACE goes down in flames. PoBoy Naval Aviation 25 December 9th 05 01:30 PM
AOPA and ATC Privatization Chip Jones Instrument Flight Rules 139 November 12th 03 08:26 PM
AOPA and ATC Privatization Chip Jones Piloting 133 November 12th 03 08:26 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.