Smokin

Delta has gotten much better since they moved the dude you're talking about. I know guys that have recorded his speeches and conversations because he said blatantly illegal things while representing Delta. That being said, of the big three, I think Delta is still the least military friendly, but that margin has shrunk considerably in the last 4 years. For example, I think that if you were sitting long call and went into the squadron and knocked out a sim, I understand that would be an issue with Delta, but I don't think United or American would care. But if I were a new guy and had CJOs at two of the three, the margin is slim enough that I wouldn't even consider it in my choice. As to the outside employment, it is commander and JAG approval. Commander basically signs that your employment won't affect your service (easy if you're just dropping two weeks of leave for indoc) and the JAG signs that it wouldn't be illegal (like working park time for Lockmart on a project you oversee in your military job).

I've always thought that some airlines (Delta) spend a fair amount of time fighting USERRA when they could use it to their advantage. If I were the chief of hiring, I'd actively recruit military pilots that are within a few years of separating (retirement or not) and get them to apply. Have them do indoc on regular leave, then drop mil leave when it is over. Sure it costs the company some money, but it would guarantee a predictable hire date and high quality pilot in a couple years. Would be rare for that pilot to then go somewhere else if he already has a couple years seniority. Really, they should have done this 3-5 years ago, then they would have a group of pilots they could count on since they knew they would need a hiring wave now. And those pilots would have burned much or all of their USERRA time already, which would make them even more predictable, as in they won't get through consolidation and then drop orders.

The lottery is math (actually a tax on people that are bad at math) and everyone knows that math is racist.

They'll just re-pass the exact same law with one word different and make people challenge it, just like they did this time. Too bad the judge didn't hold some of the lawmakers in contempt for clearly passing a law that was more restrictive than the one ruled unconstitutional.

That and states, or people, asserting their constitutional rights and claiming that the federal government is bound by law is also threatening to their plan.

https://irstaxtrouble.com/unique-tax-issues-faced-by-pilots-and-other-interstate-transportation-employees/ Just in case you don't want to take other pilot's words for it to keep you out of IRS trouble.

That is largely true. Many of the union guys involved in or that voted for the TA faced recall. With inflation at a record high and the writing on the wall that profits are going up to pre-covid levels, the companies have no motivation for serious negotiations. If I were corporate leadership, I'd start with a vastly underwhelming offer, then offer a small concession every few months just to keep kicking the can down the road while pretending to be negotiating in good faith. Meanwhile, inflation is basically giving me labor at 10% cheaper per year while I'm selling tickets at 30-40% higher than last year. Every year I can prolong finalizing a new contract, the better my profits. And if the union is dumb enough to accept a mediocre offer in the meantime, then win-win. I would bet that is why we're not hearing anything. Inflation has given the company the upper hand and they know it.

Hopefully the family can use that to sue the contractor for wrongful death. The Air Force is immune to that lawsuit, but the contractors are on the hook.

The unions are bad, but worse is just the overall culture of education. From elementary school to doctoral degrees, the culture is generally far more liberal than the surrounding community would warrant. The left made a concerted effort to take over the education system in the 60s and it paid off big time for them.

Company dependent. I bid my yearly vacation while in my second week at my initial sim qual. I had to ask my sim partner what this whole "vacation bid" was and how to do it. Reserve is timing and company dependent. I had good luck with timing the airlines, but I had a schedule my 3rd or 4th month after my check ride. Wasn't a great schedule, but it wasn't reserve either. I also know a guy that literally never sat reserve. Got a line the month after his check ride.

Just like kids. Small countries, small problems. Big countries, big problems.

Funny how she loves to play the victim. Those fat people are not the victim, they are the perpetrators. The poor bastard stuck in the middle seat between two whales is the victim. Airlines need to fix this before it gets worse. Just like the "comfort animal" problem a little while ago. If you need an animal to calm you down to fly, you probably shouldn't lock yourself in a big metal tube flying through the sky with absolutely no way to get out of it once the door shuts.

Agreed, the retirement age change would really be more of a player for disability than anything else. Unless they change the physical, I doubt that many pilots are going to be both able to pass and still want to fly. I would bet the vast majority of the guys in the 65-67 age class would be on disability and thus be irrelevant to hiring needs and seniority. I only had one CA on my no fly list. He was just angry at the world, yelled all the time (never yelled at me or the FAs, but at the controllers, scheduling, taxis, etc), and was just very unpleasant to be around. Life is too short to voluntarily be assigned with a guy like that again. One plus side to being an FO.

Not just since Floyd; I've thought the quality of police recruitment had to significantly decrease since the Ferguson riots. In recent memory, that seems to be the tipping point. Ten years ago I had considered being a cop as a retirement job. Once Ferguson happened and the cop was guilty until proven innocent, and even then not believed by many despite an exhaustive investigation that proved he was being physically assaulted by a guy twice his size, that was the end of me even considering that as an option. And it has only gotten worse since then. There has to be more people like me that would have considered being a cop, but decided that helping the society wasn't worth potentially being put in prison for correctly doing the job.

New York's response was to turn around and enact an even more restrictive gun control laws. 'sure, we'll issue permits, but the permits won't be valid anywhere you go'. On another note, 22LR pistol with a silencer... AR-15 pistol platform or standard pistol frame? Just for some fun plinking and maybe squirrel control in the yard. My silencer can be taken apart to clean, so rimfire will be some cleaning work afterwards, but won't ruin the silencer. Plus side with the actual pistol is standard velocity 22lr should still be subsonic in the <4" barrel, but the AR will be more accurate and likely more fun. Not necessarily looking at just these two, but this is ballpark of what I'm looking to get: AR pistol 7" barrel: https://www.sportsmansoutdoorsuperstore.com/products2.cfm/ID/260753 M&P22 pistol: https://www.sportsmansoutdoorsuperstore.com/products2.cfm/ID/175906

Also funny that the Democrats always seem to be upset whenever a precedent is overturned... Roe v Wade, Plessy v Ferguson, Dred Scott... As has been said elsewhere, 'I haven't seen the Democrats this upset since we took away their slaves!"

Sounds good to me!

A cancelled flight due to the airlines fault should be the same compensation as an involuntary bump.

For the UPT checkrides, I would say yes. At one point, the Delta hiring facebook page (think that's where it was) was asked this question and they said to answer yes. Your UPT checkrides are in the back of your green flight records folder, so they can see it when you give them your records. If they consider it a checkride and you answered no, you might be shown the door. If they don't, they'll read your yes answer, realize you have integrity for speaking up when you maybe didn't need to, and probably give a positive review.

Lots of rumors, nothing reliable. I've heard 19% DC, positive space commuting, pay raise, better control of schedules, etc. Now way that even 10% of the rumors are true. I highly doubt that anyone involved in the negotiations have talked about any of it, so it is likely one pilot saying what "my friend is on the committee and he said he'd like to see..." which two pilots later turns into "it's already in the TA that we're getting...".

Yes. Although if an intelligent alien species showed up at our doorstep, it would probably not be wise... The problem with the consciousness, agency, and choice argument is that I understand that all three of those are present to a surprising degree in many of the more intelligent life forms. Monkeys have recognized themselves in the mirror, which seems to me to be a self-consciousness. Octopus have shown problem solving capabilities that exceed some first graders. Similarly, under this argument, someone in a coma may no longer meet the definition of human life. This is kinda my point, that any argument that denies life is begun at conception has to have a definition that is extremely nuanced and with assumptions that will quickly change based on technological advancements. This is not a good way to decide possibly one of the most important foundations of the legal system; who is entitled to protection by the government?

If we were created, then humans have intrinsic value simply because we are human and were created in the image of God. The biologically indisputable fact that human life begins at conception confers the automatic intrinsic value of human life at the point of conception. Thus the pro-life side should not and cannot compromise. This both creates a problem and, at the same time, greatly simplifies the position of the pro-life camp. No compromise is morally permissible. The problem of life and value with the pro-choice folks is that they ultimately have very little, if any, ground to stand on with life and value, which is why they will always call the baby a "fetus". Fetus is simply Latin for 'young' or 'offspring' and the pro-choice group has picked that term because it has less emotion; it is an intentional obscuration by obfuscation. Ultimately, if our ancestors evolved from single cell organisms in a primordial soup, then the only value life has is the usefulness of that life from the beholder's perspective. Any other value is illogical with the theory of evolution and is simply stealing from the Christian worldview. If humans were not created, than what makes our lives any more valuable than any life? For that matter, what makes the normal human cells in my body more valuable than cancer cells? Only because they are more useful to me because they keep me alive. Such a viewpoint is incompatible with civilized society, but that is the logical end of the pro-choice argument. Similarly, the viability argument seems like nonsense. The left may argue that human life begins when the "offspring" is "viable", but it is absurd to base a definition of something so important to what we are based on something that can change. What is "viable"? Is a premature baby viable at 20 weeks because some have survived with modern medical care? In 20 years will the new standard become 20 days because of medical advances? Is a two year old not viable because he wouldn't last a week without parents actively caring for him? I used to be pro-choice because I looked at the issue with an excessively cold 'what is the best for society' viewpoint. From that viewpoint, unwanted babies are not best for society as a whole, so abortion should be legal up to the point of delivery. That viewpoint, by the way, is largely the viewpoint that got Planned Parenthood started and placed in primarily poor minority areas. Once I became a Christian and re-evaluated the issue with a Christian worldview, I realized I was looking at the issue from the wrong direction and flipped my position 180 almost overnight.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/turkey-terrorizes-nations-capital-maryland Only in a neutered place like DC... that turkey would end up on a dinner table where I live.

United will as well. One move to a base.

The solution to bad speech is good speech. It always has been and always will be. Not regulation, but more and better speech. A paper from an obscure associate law professor is hardly a convincing proof. There are exceptions to the First Amendment (for example, can't yell fire in a crowded movie theater (Justice Holmes - far more authoritative than one of 10,000+ associate professors)), but the Supreme Court has consistently held that any restrictions to the First Amendment is reviewed under Strict Scrutiny. Justice Souter said, Strict Scrutiny "leaves few survivors", as in it is exceptionally difficult to pass a law restricting content of speech. We as country have moved far away from what made us a country to begin with and then made us great (not a reference to Trump. Clearly we are/were an exceptional country and are rapidly moving away from our roots as a republic). How many Americans today would agree with the sentiment that "I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"? As others have pointed out, how can a government agency be the arbitrators of truth? 500 years ago this agency would have worked to shut down talk that the earth was round. 200 years ago the abolitionist movement would have been shut down for claiming that people should not be slaves. To claim that you have the corner on what is truth is the pinnacle of arrogance and the end of a republic. I am not exaggerating and not giving an emotional argument. If this board stands, our great experiment in a republic is done because you cannot have a republic where the government determines what can and cannot be said.