![]() |
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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
NOW you're talking about something substantive. Of course what you've
described is an issue -- so get your collective heads out of your collective butts about having to dress professionally, and start discussing the *real* issues. YOU started this thread. YOU are the one that focused on the dress code and ignored the rest of the newly imposed work rules. NATCA throwing a fit about a minor dress code change was newsworthy enough for AvWeb to pick up; thus, the thread. My statement stands. If controllers want issues to be taken seriously, tell your union to stop worrying about the window dressing, stop whining about having to dress like businesspeople, and focus on the substantive issues. Starting a dispute over this kind of stuff isn't doing anything but make NATCA look unprofessional. -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
If controllers want issues to be taken seriously,
tell your union to stop worrying about the window dressing, stop whining about having to dress like businesspeople, and focus on the substantive issues. If the FAA wants issues to be taken seriously, tell them to stop dressing the window, stop treating controllers like children whose mind stops once they are in casual clothing, and focus on the substantive issues. Lord knows, the FAA has plenty of them. Jose -- There are more ways to skin a cat than there are cats. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
When I read it, I took it a different way. I took it as a sign of how
off-track the FAA could be in requiring such a superficial thing in the face of other, as you have said, more important issues. The other rule changes can be debated. Instituting a dress code and then debating it, is a waste of time. And another thing, no controller should report to work without having used mouthwash... Appearance is a funny thing. It is difficult to determine if someone just doesn't care about their appearance or their job - or that they feel so confident in what they do that they believe that appearance doesn't matter. Rather than institute a dress code, find out which of these two is the cause. For the first, fire. For the second, educate. The guy that always dresses nicely among shorts and tee-shirts is probably the one that is afraid someone will discover his incompetence. I'm not a real big supporter of unions. I'm sure that there are good examples out there but my exposure has been with people taking advantage of union representation so that they could do the least that they could do with maximum pay and benefits. It would seem to me that, if the union was doing it's job, that it would be asking union members to do their best and look their best. ------------------------------- Travis Lake N3094P PWK "Jay Honeck" wrote in message ups.com... NOW you're talking about something substantive. Of course what you've described is an issue -- so get your collective heads out of your collective butts about having to dress professionally, and start discussing the *real* issues. YOU started this thread. YOU are the one that focused on the dress code and ignored the rest of the newly imposed work rules. NATCA throwing a fit about a minor dress code change was newsworthy enough for AvWeb to pick up; thus, the thread. My statement stands. If controllers want issues to be taken seriously, tell your union to stop worrying about the window dressing, stop whining about having to dress like businesspeople, and focus on the substantive issues. Starting a dispute over this kind of stuff isn't doing anything but make NATCA look unprofessional. -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Jay Honeck" wrote in message ups.com... NATCA throwing a fit about a minor dress code change was newsworthy enough for AvWeb to pick up; thus, the thread. NATCA isn't throwing a fit about a minor dress code change. What made you think it was? The AvWeb piece you quoted refers to "the new rules cited by management", the dress code is just one of them. It is the whole body of newly imposed rules that is the issue. Nor did AvWeb mention cutoffs or flip-flops, but you zeroed right in on them. It's true that shorts are banned in the dress code, but AvWeb didn't say they were. What was your source for that? You must have had additional information before you started this thread. Why didn't you cite any of them? My statement stands. If controllers want issues to be taken seriously, tell your union to stop worrying about the window dressing, stop whining about having to dress like businesspeople, and focus on the substantive issues. Starting a dispute over this kind of stuff isn't doing anything but make NATCA look unprofessional. NATCA doesn't listen to me. It appears to me that NATCA is focused on the entire body of newly imposed work rules, and it is just you that is focused on the dress code. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
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 |