Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 05/30/2015 in all areas

  1. 2 points
    To me, "disenfranchised" has always meant "to be deprived of the right to vote." Other than for a period of time lasting 15 minutes, constituting a small fraction of a one percent of the time the vote was open, no one was deprived of the right to vote. One could say that only 41.7% of the group voted in favour of the agreement; or one could say that only slightly over a third of the group voted (35%) voted against. And I think it's fair to say that the 18.3% of the group who couldn't be bothered to vote, probably isn't overly emotionally invested in the outcome either way. As someone else put it, countries have been held together by closer margins...
  2. 2 points
    Actually it doesn't sound to me that what they did was the right thing. It seems to me that good airmanship would have called for rejecting the take-off and sorting out things on the ground. By continuing the take-off they were only assuming that there was still enough runway left. I'm just glad it worked out ok. They may well have recognized the mistake they had made and were confident of the runway left, but it also presumably meant that neither their computed V1 or VR speeds were correct either, and they would only be guessing at those as well.
  3. 1 point
  4. 1 point
    Not to detract from the other images but this video struck me as inspirational on many levels https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrYZqLCBPGo
  5. 1 point
    I guess as posted above it was done a lot before ramps became more tightly controlled, (done that), but if there is anything that I could see really being a "Possible" concern it may be the heeled shoes in the nacelle. I think some nacelles have noise suppression panels that may not like the pressure of heels. Not 100% on that but maybe someone like Mitch would know. Don't think that a rear end on the Aluminium has the same potential for damage.
  6. 1 point
    I'm not going to be popular, but $50,000 per year plus benefits and pension is pretty dear for a job that takes no prior experience and about two days of on-the-job training. There are literally millions of workers across the country that make WAY less and work harder in worse conditions. While it's not a job that I would want, especially at + or -30, it isn't particularly difficult, nor does it take anything more than a high school education, if that. ... I would suggest that our ramp guys work harder in the same conditions for less money. I don't think it is unreasonable for companies to expect to pay near what they pay their own employees for outsourced service. Otherwise, why would you outsource? An example of a too-successful union and a management that thought that their costs were just "pass through" and ignored the obvious long term downside. Yes, it is unfortunate that these guys will take a pay cut if they can't find another no-skills-required job at the same compensation level (and they won't), but very skilled workers at AC took one of almost the same proportions about 12 years ago. That guy with 47 years of service has been living a pretty good life considering what his skills would earn him in another job, or even what he thought he would earn in the long term when he got hired. And any pension that he has earned isn't going to dissolve. Like a good night at the blackjack table.... it's been a good run.