Dress Code

Jay Honeck writes:

My belief that most federal employees are underworked and overpaid is
not "disdain".

Does that apply to air traffic control?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Jay Honeck wrote:
The individuals who make up the FAA are government employees. You have
clearly stated your disdain for government employees more than once in these
forums.


My belief that most federal employees are underworked and overpaid is
not "disdain". It is something, however, that could be easily and
swiftly addressed, under any new administration.

How many federal employees do you know?

Margy (a fed as of Monday, and yes, I only worked 45+ hours last week
and only half a day today, but I'll work a full 5 later this week).
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
oups.com...
http://vanityfairmusings.blogspot.co...n-hall-of.html

My God. I had no idea the FAA was so controlled by their union that
they feel they must put up with this sort of thing. Imagine -- they've
got a current employee, on staff, who runs a website solely for the
purposes of impugning his employer!

Yes, what an indignity: a government agency forced to respect employees'
right to criticize the government. That certainly shows how evil unions are.

--Gary

Yes, what an indignity: a government agency forced to respect employees'
right to criticize the government. That certainly shows how evil unions are.

They're not criticizing the "government" -- that is every Amercan's
right. They *are* openly slandering their *employer* -- and in the
real world that should be a one-way trip to the unemployment line.

Of course, since the FAA is only playing with "pretend" money -- our
taxes -- it is apparently just fine that the inmates are running the
asylum. Unbelievable.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On 20 Sep 2006 14:12:22 -0700, "Jay Honeck" wrote
in .com:

They *are* openly slandering their *employer*

Are you able to provide some examples of the "slander" you mention?

They *are* openly slandering their *employer*

Are you able to provide some examples of the "slander" you mention?

Well, let's start by assigning cutesy, disrespectiful names to the
company CEO on a blog site.

Is that slander? No, I suppose legally it is not. It IS
insubordination, however, and in any other business or company in the
world, would result in immediate termination.

And it should.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Man, I'm glad I don't work for you. You should be too. I'm in a union and I
work my ass off, but I don't tolerate disrespect from anybody-including my
employer. Without my union, I wouldn't have been there 1 year, let alone the
22 I have been, no matter how hard I worked because I don't show the proper
fear. Of course, you're an employer. And I guess it's not enough for you-or
any employer-to make a profit on the backs of your employees. You expect
them to cower in fear of you and be grateful that you've allowed them to
work for you.

What a pile of crap. Of course, in your narrow mind, no employer would ever
think of abusing an employee-at least not without good reason, right? All
employers are benevelont, warm hearted , caring souls who value their
employees above everything. We employees are just a bunch of blood sucking,
lazy, ungrateful maggots.

The FAA always does the right thing, like adequately staff towers. They
would never think of saving a few bucks by understaffing because, hey, these
guys just sit around most of the time anyway, right? The FAA would never
risk lives by adding people that weren't needed just because the union said
they were. Oh. Wait. Didn't 50 or so people just die because of an
understaffed tower? Oh. That's right. It was all the pilot's fault.

mike

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
oups.com...
They *are* openly slandering their *employer*

Are you able to provide some examples of the "slander" you mention?

Well, let's start by assigning cutesy, disrespectiful names to the
company CEO on a blog site.

Is that slander? No, I suppose legally it is not. It IS
insubordination, however, and in any other business or company in the
world, would result in immediate termination.

And it should.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"mike regish" wrote in message
news

The FAA always does the right thing, like adequately staff towers. They
would never think of saving a few bucks by understaffing because, hey,
these guys just sit around most of the time anyway, right? The FAA would
never risk lives by adding people that weren't needed just because the
union said they were. Oh. Wait. Didn't 50 or so people just die because of
an understaffed tower?


No. 50 or so people did not just die because of an understaffed tower.



Oh. That's right. It was all the pilot's fault.


Yes.

In article ,
"mike regish" wrote:

Didn't 50 or so people just die because of an
understaffed tower?

How about let's wait for all the facts to come out and
not have those deaths be part of some anti-union/pro-union
fight.

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

mike regish wrote:
Without my union, I wouldn't have been there 1 year

You know, that's my problem with unions. They keep people employed who
shouldn't be employed. Now, I don't know you, don't know how you work,
but there's something wrong with that mentality. If it takes someone
else to keep you employed, you need to think long and hard about your
work ethic.