gearhog

Damn dude, so racist. Red dot!

False dichotomy. The question of "brotherhood" or "camaraderie" is a question of infinite variables in people and personality that's constantly changing. There's a spectrum-wide range of mission, leadership, location, aircraft, ops temp, etc in either org. There's also an equally wide range of people in every unit, be it AD or AFR/ANG. Generally speaking, you'll find more good people than not and the quality of your relationships with your coworkers depends entirely on you, not the branch of service. There's no difference, and you'll only get anecdotal evidence based on limited experience with any answer to this.

Sounds like someone spiked your drink without you knowing. It's a single variable on a very long and complex application process. Many disqualifying items stipulate "having a history of....". A one off event, to me, does not indicate you having a history of an underlying medical condition or even a behavioral issue. But it's subjective, I'm not a flt doc, and in my experience most flight docs wouldn't care. However, there's a chance you face a bad flight doc on a bad day. What are you going to do? Not apply? Go for it. Don't divulge. Don't lie.

So what's the problem? That's just the Guard, man. Administrative processes are always measured in months, not days. Especially at NGB. Only 5 people work there, and they're all traditional working every other week, Tues-Thurs, 0900-1100 and 1300-1500.

Self-inflicted with a handgun. Good dude. Would have never imagined it.

He's a dishonest huckster because you believe you've found a semantical flaw in the phrase "cultural Marxism" that he uses in a few of his arguments? He repeatedly admits he is open to the idea that there could be errors in his logic, and seeks to find intellectually honest debates to find "truth". You're simply dismissing the entirety of the man's ideas because you disagree with the way he placed two words together, yet you're providing no original alternatives to any of them... and it took you 4 paragraphs to do it, which reeks more of pseudo-intellectualism than anything he has said.

Has anyone had a GTC negatively affect their credit score? I was recently scheduled for a sim, our RA purchased airline tickets using my GTC thru SATO. The Guard Bureau cancelled the sim due to end of FY lack of funds. My orders were cancelled, my sim was cancelled, and my airline tickets were cancelled 2 days prior. I had a bunch of SATO fees with no way to create an authorization or voucher without orders. Long story short, no one could figure out (or were willing to try) how to pay the pill in DTS with no orders, and Citi eventually suspends my card and says the charges are going to a collection agency and will be reflected on my credit score. So I pay it out of my own pocket, late, to avoid further headaches. Today, I get an email saying my score has changed, but I have zero debt any where, for any thing. The connection between Experian and USAA is down so I am unable to view the negative factors.

But I think it should be, sometimes. Most of us volunteer to serve and expect that our efforts and sacrifices for the common good of the people and ideas we value will be somewhat apparent. We've probably all had experiences where our service, our rush to the aid of others, was so deeply satisfying that we wish we could have sacrificed more and wished for nothing in return. When it's not so apparent, say when training or doing administrative/bureaucratic jobs, you may be able to convince them that the fruits of their service exist, but you need to compensate them and accommodate a reasonable amount of their desires. However, when a person too often sees that their efforts and sacrifices are either squandered or even detrimental to what they believe they are serving, they stop believing that what they're doing is actual "Service", and no amount of finger wagging while repeating "Service before Self" is going to make them stick around.

I understand the necessity to correct the misconceptions, it's just that the corrections don't change the result. That result being: This is not something a Guard guy should feel compelled to accept.

Start here at 21:35, then watch the entire interview: Then here: Then checkout the Sam Harris and Joe Rogan Experience podcasts with Peterson, Weinstein, Dave Atilla, etc.

That's a vague accusation. Either the threat exists or it doesn't. You acknowledge that it exists, you're just disputing your interpretation of an unspecified individual's statement of how great the threat is. Hardly qualifies an argument that the whole board is sucking it's own c^&*,

I'm in a Guard unit that my be tagged for an AFG air advisor tasking in 2019. I'm having a hard time understanding your post because I don't know what positions your speaking from or about. I may be wrong, but your post and Homestar's post seem to be defending the assignment. Are you saying it's a good deal for a guard guy, or bad, but not that bad...?

I'm hopeful that this PC culture is about to experience a massive backlash. If the momentum the "intellectual dark web" movement is gaining with people like Sam Harris, Eric Weinstein, Jordan Peterson, Dave Rubin, etc, is any indication, we'll soon be able to relax a little.

What in the actual F? I clearly heard him say "F'n" the first couple times I watched it, then I could not hear it again. Bizarre

God bless ya for doing what you're doing, but for clarification, you're arguing with a guy who is making the case it sucks. Are you saying it's a good deal or are you just saying your facts for substantiating that it is a shit deal are better than his facts for substantiating its a shit deal?

Say you're tagged as an Afghan Air Advisor. You go. You make the best of it and give it your best effort. You even build friendships with good people. Then this is the result: https://www.stripes.com/news/assassins-threaten-multibillion-dollar-us-efforts-to-keep-afghan-airmen-flying-1.552494 Worth it?

Heard a nasty rumor a Herc unit may be getting tagged for this in 2019. I guarantee every traditional IP's hand is spring loaded to smash the "F this I'm out" button like a contestant on Family Feud.

Damn. His resignation letter speaks volumes. Concerning.

Instead of telling people to do the right thing and intervene when someone does dumb shit, we are supposed to use the words “red dot!” when we speak to indicate something bad is happening. Then we say, or be, or do a “green dot” something or other that is supposed to mean being proactive in doing the right thing. It’s idiotic and makes you want to choke someone.

Roger. But I would counter that if PBS makes a weak company strong, larger more important problems lie elsewhere. Looking at the historical data, fundamentally strong companies have not required PBS to grow and increase profitability. Let's say, for argument's sake, PBS gives a pilot more control over his schedule. You're also saying PBS is also more efficient for the company. That has to mean more productivity per unit of labor. In other words, employees are required to work more. So yes, if I were to concede (which I'm not 😄 ) a pilot may have somewhat greater control, but it would be over more required work. The apple was a poor analogy to the monthly schedule. I'm abandoning it. As above, line bidding was likely not the cause of the furlough. Just because a company failed during line bidding doesn't mean it's a fantastic business model under PBS. You're right about the number of pilots. Why not require an even fewer number of pilots to fly a schedule every month that will max out thier FAR work/rest limits for the benefit of the company? Blaming fellow pilots for the woes of the industry? That's a conversation better had on your union message board. Just kidding! Don't ever do that!

If there is a correlation between line bidding and being vulnerable to furlough, how would you reconcile that the big airlines which have furloughed and/or declared bankruptcy use PBS while airlines which have never furloughed use line bidding? I believe a company's financial health has more to do with it's business model, strategic plan, and quality of management than the different methods by which the same flying schedule is executed. If the company has an apple at the beginning of the month, is it better for them to turn their back, peel it, slice it, and distribute the different pieces among the pilots... or is it better for them to simply hand the apple to the pilots? Opinions vary depending somewhat on your idea of fairness. Now things have changed, but many pilots who have been in the industry a while are not looking at Delta captains with a longing gaze as they remember, circa 2005, when thousands of Delta captains had multi-million dollar retirement accounts wiped out for pennies on the dollar.

More productivity is good for the company because labor is the biggest single operating expense. If the company wants to reduce cost, they increase the productivity per unit of labor. But a cost still exists, so who's paying it and how? The employees are paying it with a different resource: time. That's because the company would like to keep their pilots in the seat more hours of the day, more days of the month, while reducing the employee opportunities for absenteeism. Of course, there are lots of people who are fine with flying their ass of for a big paycheck. And I'm sure there's no shortage of stories of PBS pilots who worked 3 days a month. But let's face facts, that's not the status quo. You're right that the unions committees and the voting memberships are responsible for the details of the scheduling section of the contract and the specifics very greatly from airline to airline. However, the two distinct categories of schedule management, line bidding and PBS, remain very different. PBS came into being during a period when pilots were a dime a dozen and the economy was poor and sold to the membership as a mutually beneficial plan to mitigate the threat of the company folding. As I understand it, every airline that does not already have PBS recently opened the last round of negotiations with "We want PBS" and their unions said "Absolutely a non-starter." Why? Because the union committees studied every other airline contract in the industry upside down and inside out and determined they have leverage and it's a regression in work rules. That is, if the membership values seniority rules and schedule flexibility above sacrificing personal time for productivity. And of course, not everyone does. There are good things about PBS, but when you compare the sum totals of the benefits of drawbacks of each system, there's a reason why the most financially stable airlines over the last couple of decades do not have PBS.

Congrats on your retirement. I'm a few months behind you, and also trying to cover all the bases.

Until you get burned a few times by having the TDY cancelled last minute by the Guard Bureau (after you've taken military leave) due to lack of funds, cancelled by the Sq due lack of interest from other crewmembers, or cancelled by MX for broken aircraft. Then you sit around the Sq all week trying to recoup a fraction of your lost airline pay by logging doubles doing CBTs and OPRs if the network is up. I sure hope I don't sound bitter.

Of course. What TSA employee wouldn't rather go to an airfield, impede productivity, annoy crewmembers, and hate their job for slightly better benefits?