Dress Code

"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

"Newps" wrote in message
. ..
http://vanityfairmusings.blogspot.co...n-hall-of.html

Which one is you?


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO (MTJ)

On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 21:40:01 -0600, Newps wrote
in :

http://vanityfairmusings.blogspot.co...n-hall-of.html


More photographs he http://vanityfairmusings.blogspot.com/

Is this Mr. McNicoll?
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/1...lothes19.0.jpg

:-)

Uh, no. You get shot here in Montana for wearing anything like that,
for any reason.




Matt Barrow wrote:
"Newps" wrote in message
. ..

http://vanityfairmusings.blogspot.co...n-hall-of.html


Which one is you?

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"

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

Their employer *is* the government. (And there's nothing resembling slander
here.)

--Gary

"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
...
"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
oups.com...
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*

Their employer *is* the government. (And there's nothing resembling
slander here.)

--Gary



I think slander is the wrong word. But how about insubordination?

One of the things that makes this country a Great Country (I guess I am sort of patriotic) is the freedoms that we have. I am greatly disturbed when they are taken from us, and even more disturbed when we willingly give them up. There are many freedoms here, and most people don't use most of them. That's ok. There are many freedoms I don't use, and the freedom to say "yes" is meaningless without the freedom to say "no". But even if I say "no", I value the freedom to say "yes".

That is fundamental.

Imagine -- they've got a current employee,
on staff, who runs a website solely for the
purposes of impugning his employer!

Imagine that.

I have no quarrel with my employer (after all, I'm self employed), so if the freedom to impunge my employer were taken away from me, it wouldn't affect my daily life. But I think it's an important freedom, and part of what makes this country great.

And what a fool. He has neatly and succinctly documented his own
insubordination.

Imagine that. In this country, we are free to be stupid, in the eyes of others.

and publishing it worldwide?

I was taught in grade school history that the Constitution of the United States says we can do exactly that. Thousands of people died in order to preserve this freedom, and it is irrespective of whether or not you agree with what is being published. Imagine that. We can actually =publish= stupid things! And get away with it!

My respect for controllers could not have been more diminished.

Your respect for controllers must have been very thin indeed.

I've never seen an organization with a more
self-destructive workforce in my life

If the FAA operates with a staff as small as that documented on the website, maybe I should be worried. OTOH, if those individuals are the entirety of our national airspace control system, and they can actually make it work all by themselves.... gee, I'd double their pay and let them work naked with a chicken if they wanted to.

I have a suspicion however that what you are seeing is the personal opinion of a handful of people. Hardly something that I'd get my knickers in a twit about.

If any further evidence of the need to
privatize the FAA is necessary, I will be very surprised.

I really don't see the connection at all. A privatized FAA will in short order mean user fees for all small aircraft. In exchange, we might be granted the privilage of being worked by controllers who wear a suit and tie. Frankly, when I'm in an airplane, I don't see any reason to care what the controllers are wearing. I =do= see a reason to care whether or not they are happy working there. If they are not happy working there, I expect I will hear more of "Four two Victor, break off your practice approach at one thousand five hundred"... which of course makes the approach useless for currency or competence.

I never had any reason to disrespect
the individuals who made up the FAA. To
a man, they've always been
smart, kind, and professional.

They are the same people you've always been dealing with. You can either change your opinion of the people, or change your opinion of what constitutes "smart, kind, and professional". I'd actually reccomend you consider the latter.

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