Service Air B747F
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rosbif,
And what Canadian operator should be supplying these services to Air Canada? A fantasy 747 operator (Service Air/Titan Air), a DC10 operator (ACE)?
The MD11 is a great aircraft for this run. 200K payload and a great fuel burn. The DC10 wont get you the payload required on a transpacific run, and the 747-200 fuel burn makes it less economical to operate versus the MD11.
Obviously it's not fair to make Air Canada use the wrong aircraft for the job just because it's Canadian... Wait a sec, the government already does that by blocking out American satellite TV providers (but that's another battle).
If there were a Canadian MD11 operator they would have the business as the CTA would not grant the rights to Gemini/World/etc.
Let's say this was trucking and I needed a 5 ton, but my only local options were a 53' tractor or a minivan. Should I have to settle on one of those because they're Canadian or do I have the rights to search out the correct tool for the job.
And what Canadian operator should be supplying these services to Air Canada? A fantasy 747 operator (Service Air/Titan Air), a DC10 operator (ACE)?
The MD11 is a great aircraft for this run. 200K payload and a great fuel burn. The DC10 wont get you the payload required on a transpacific run, and the 747-200 fuel burn makes it less economical to operate versus the MD11.
Obviously it's not fair to make Air Canada use the wrong aircraft for the job just because it's Canadian... Wait a sec, the government already does that by blocking out American satellite TV providers (but that's another battle).
If there were a Canadian MD11 operator they would have the business as the CTA would not grant the rights to Gemini/World/etc.
Let's say this was trucking and I needed a 5 ton, but my only local options were a 53' tractor or a minivan. Should I have to settle on one of those because they're Canadian or do I have the rights to search out the correct tool for the job.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: out of a suitcase
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a bunch of tosh.
When AC needs a DC 10 they call ACE and then ACE tries to get one going. Transport then drag their feet until AC have an excuse to go somewhere else for the lift. They then need an MD 11, and before anyone in Canada has the opportunity to lease one and then get it approved, in comes World with one ready to go.
It seems strange to me that AC always has a requirement for whichever aircraft is not available in Canada and then changes its requirement if the aircraft does become available.
It is also not a coincidence that World is run by someone very close to AC. (if memory serves me correctly)
Whether the cargo work really comes back to AC's 777"s remains to be seen. If AC can continue to get away with using cheaper US based subcontractors, they will apply for extensions and drag it out for as long as they possibly can. If a Canadian subcontractor puts out a bid with a suitable aircraft, AC will change the requirement at the last moment to something that no Canadian operator has.
That is how this game is played. It's all about getting the job done as cheaply as possible. That is why the Halifax 747 incident happened, and it is why our jobs are given away to whoever will do them cheapest.
The Canadian government is asleep at the wheel -as usual.
When AC needs a DC 10 they call ACE and then ACE tries to get one going. Transport then drag their feet until AC have an excuse to go somewhere else for the lift. They then need an MD 11, and before anyone in Canada has the opportunity to lease one and then get it approved, in comes World with one ready to go.
It seems strange to me that AC always has a requirement for whichever aircraft is not available in Canada and then changes its requirement if the aircraft does become available.
It is also not a coincidence that World is run by someone very close to AC. (if memory serves me correctly)
Whether the cargo work really comes back to AC's 777"s remains to be seen. If AC can continue to get away with using cheaper US based subcontractors, they will apply for extensions and drag it out for as long as they possibly can. If a Canadian subcontractor puts out a bid with a suitable aircraft, AC will change the requirement at the last moment to something that no Canadian operator has.
That is how this game is played. It's all about getting the job done as cheaply as possible. That is why the Halifax 747 incident happened, and it is why our jobs are given away to whoever will do them cheapest.
The Canadian government is asleep at the wheel -as usual.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: canada
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rosbif. You still haven't answered the question. Which operator in Canada has a widebody cargo machine to meet the requirements of AC? You yourself state that AC whent to ACE first. If ACE can't provide the equipment, now what? AC runs a business not unlike any other- time is money, money is time. Suffice it to say that all this contract sh*t runs out shortly and as per the deal signed with Milton, AC pilots WILL be flying cargo soon, your cheap shots are a reflection of your misery.
This forum provides a means to let the steam out but also shows how miserable people are. I suspect you're in the latter group (towards AC). No harsh feelings mate, just an observation, eh?
This forum provides a means to let the steam out but also shows how miserable people are. I suspect you're in the latter group (towards AC). No harsh feelings mate, just an observation, eh?
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rosbif,
Not sure what "that's a bunch of tosh" means.
You might want to spend a little more time looking at the economics of these aircraft and less time concerning what flag is on the aircraft.
The DC10 is a less than ideal tool for transpacific. Run the numbers and you'll lose your shirt with it trying to operate PVG-ANC-YYZ with enough yield to make a buck!
Don't see Transport Canada having anything to do with this. The DC10 cannot do the asia run as profitably as a MD11 - period!
I'd find it hard to believe that ACE would have gone out and secured a DC10 without a LOI or a contract from AC. If they did shame on them. If AC had a contract with them then they can expect a legal battle at some point.
Additionally, why would Air Canada or ACE be eager to do business with each other after AC cancelled the domestic contract in September?
From all I've seen and read it appears to be a "if you build it they will come" type approach but who knows. John's a smart guy at ACE and they'll likely have some work lined up for it (heard at one point an intra-Europe operation).
Either way, definitely best of luck to ACE and congrats on the new addition.
Don't know what your beef is with Air Canada or with World, but the fact is that foreign operators currently have the equipment to do the job. If a Canadian operator could get a decent wide body freighter in operation there would be plenty of opportunity.
Don't understand how you're bringing the YHZ incident into this discussion. I guess by your standards no foreign operators should operate on Canadian soil? The MK air flight wasn't being subbed out by any Canadian carrier and was stopping in YHZ to top the load. What's a Canadian operator to do, try and operate YHZ-LGG for fish? The only way these guys were trying to make it work was to split the load between JFK and YHZ and since no Canadian operator was servicing the run, TC granted the rights.
If ACE had secured an aircraft that was suitable for the task I would say that perhaps you have a slight arguement, but to say the DC10 should suffice wrong. But, the two are not the same. The MD11 has almost 25% more capacity and payload with a lower fuel burn... But I guess that's not really a consideration right? Just the fact that it's a foreign carrier.
Either way, sounds like you're all full of piss and vinegar, so enjoy your rant.
Not sure what "that's a bunch of tosh" means.
You might want to spend a little more time looking at the economics of these aircraft and less time concerning what flag is on the aircraft.
The DC10 is a less than ideal tool for transpacific. Run the numbers and you'll lose your shirt with it trying to operate PVG-ANC-YYZ with enough yield to make a buck!
Don't see Transport Canada having anything to do with this. The DC10 cannot do the asia run as profitably as a MD11 - period!
I'd find it hard to believe that ACE would have gone out and secured a DC10 without a LOI or a contract from AC. If they did shame on them. If AC had a contract with them then they can expect a legal battle at some point.
Additionally, why would Air Canada or ACE be eager to do business with each other after AC cancelled the domestic contract in September?
From all I've seen and read it appears to be a "if you build it they will come" type approach but who knows. John's a smart guy at ACE and they'll likely have some work lined up for it (heard at one point an intra-Europe operation).
Either way, definitely best of luck to ACE and congrats on the new addition.
Don't know what your beef is with Air Canada or with World, but the fact is that foreign operators currently have the equipment to do the job. If a Canadian operator could get a decent wide body freighter in operation there would be plenty of opportunity.
Don't understand how you're bringing the YHZ incident into this discussion. I guess by your standards no foreign operators should operate on Canadian soil? The MK air flight wasn't being subbed out by any Canadian carrier and was stopping in YHZ to top the load. What's a Canadian operator to do, try and operate YHZ-LGG for fish? The only way these guys were trying to make it work was to split the load between JFK and YHZ and since no Canadian operator was servicing the run, TC granted the rights.
If ACE had secured an aircraft that was suitable for the task I would say that perhaps you have a slight arguement, but to say the DC10 should suffice wrong. But, the two are not the same. The MD11 has almost 25% more capacity and payload with a lower fuel burn... But I guess that's not really a consideration right? Just the fact that it's a foreign carrier.
Either way, sounds like you're all full of piss and vinegar, so enjoy your rant.
Last edited by cargodawg; 16th May 2005 at 18:54.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Alberta
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
74Tweaker - you had a deal pending with your half of the lease signed!? I've never heard anything so stupid. Of course you had your half signed...only problem was that the other half needed to be signed, that's the important half.
The only reasons 'dreamed up' were that there was no money, no experience, no business. Pretty simple. It was a lame dog from the start, and JD has proven his track record once again. Hopefully no one else lost too much time / money.
Oh, by the way - A/C are a dime a dozen right now...if you had money, business and experience, you'd at least know that! But I'm sure it's 'not a problem'...
I hate to say I told you so.
The only reasons 'dreamed up' were that there was no money, no experience, no business. Pretty simple. It was a lame dog from the start, and JD has proven his track record once again. Hopefully no one else lost too much time / money.
Oh, by the way - A/C are a dime a dozen right now...if you had money, business and experience, you'd at least know that! But I'm sure it's 'not a problem'...
I hate to say I told you so.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: canada
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C150. You seem to have a habbit of piping-in with short stupid comments that don't contribute anything to the thread. You have been referred to as a lonely instigator in a previous thread. Why don't you show us how useful you are in a positive way for once.
It's not that hard. You just have to stay focussed on the topic, and try to resist any stupid comments that seem to be constantly distracting you. This will also help you at your AC interview if you're lucky to get one. Remember now, I'm just trying to help you out. Cheers mate.
It's not that hard. You just have to stay focussed on the topic, and try to resist any stupid comments that seem to be constantly distracting you. This will also help you at your AC interview if you're lucky to get one. Remember now, I'm just trying to help you out. Cheers mate.
Last edited by Cyow; 23rd May 2005 at 19:38.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: out of a suitcase
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C your whatever and Deputy Dawg.
I wasn't trying to answer your questions, and you have not tried to answer mine.
My point, in case you missed it, is that Air Canada seems to get whatever it wants from the Canadian government. It is very convenient to them that there are no Canadian operators with lift that meets their requirement. It gives them an excuse to subcontract to cheaper US (or other) based companies. (Do I have to remind you that Canadians cannot even apply to work for these companies, even when they are hauling freight within Canada's border ?)
I suspect that if there were a Canadian company that could get the job done for a reasonable price with exactly the right aircraft, AC would most likely tell everyone that their requirement had changed.
I think that some people confuse cause and effect.
It is a perfectly clear and coherent argument, and one that I am sure all of the AC supporters would understand if, for example, Sunwing were to start plying some of the favourite AC routes with aircraft from Iceland or the UK. Suddenly, you would all be against subcontracting to foreign carriers.
And for your information, both c150 and I have jobs and are not bitter in the slightest. I for one, however, find your "I'm alright Jack" attitude very uncaring and selfish.
I do not think that the hundreds of Canadian pilots waiting for jobs to materialise would agree that subcontracting to foreign carriers is something that other Canadian pilots should be condoning.
Some (not all) of you AC types seem to live in your own little world.
I wasn't trying to answer your questions, and you have not tried to answer mine.
My point, in case you missed it, is that Air Canada seems to get whatever it wants from the Canadian government. It is very convenient to them that there are no Canadian operators with lift that meets their requirement. It gives them an excuse to subcontract to cheaper US (or other) based companies. (Do I have to remind you that Canadians cannot even apply to work for these companies, even when they are hauling freight within Canada's border ?)
I suspect that if there were a Canadian company that could get the job done for a reasonable price with exactly the right aircraft, AC would most likely tell everyone that their requirement had changed.
I think that some people confuse cause and effect.
It is a perfectly clear and coherent argument, and one that I am sure all of the AC supporters would understand if, for example, Sunwing were to start plying some of the favourite AC routes with aircraft from Iceland or the UK. Suddenly, you would all be against subcontracting to foreign carriers.
And for your information, both c150 and I have jobs and are not bitter in the slightest. I for one, however, find your "I'm alright Jack" attitude very uncaring and selfish.
I do not think that the hundreds of Canadian pilots waiting for jobs to materialise would agree that subcontracting to foreign carriers is something that other Canadian pilots should be condoning.
Some (not all) of you AC types seem to live in your own little world.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
c150, I read your lame dribble over on the "other" forum and see you've decided to bring your useless comments here. Learn to articulate your position or sit back in the cheap seats and remain a silent observer. See bottom.
Rosbif, wow, that's a witty comeback trying to come up with some lame derogatory "burn" on some user handles. Very nice - you must have done well on your debate team.
What you fail to see in the picture here is that this is business first. This is not a socialist "make-work" project for Canadians as you'd like to see.
If the job could be done by a Canadian company with Canadian pilots, great. If not (which is clearly the case) so be it. Should AC shut the program down because canucks aren't at the stick? I'm sure you'd love to see that.
This arrangement allows AC to test the cargo model with the desired aircraft type prior to bring it in house. I suppose you'd like to see AC go out purchase the aircraft, train the crews, invest in the infrastructure only to find that the model doesnt work. Or perhaps you'd like to see some other Canadian carrier go out, get the aircraft required, train the crews, only to have it disappear in a couple of years when AC takes it inhouse. And then what's to become of them with no contract or home for the aircraft?
You need to have a bit more vision and look further down the road son. Your myopic views are what cause short term gain and long term pain.
And Canadian pilots at a disadvantage? You need to stop feeling sorry for yourself. How many Canadians are flying abroad for carriers like Cathay, etc etc. Perhaps the Chinese should kick all of them out because they're foreigners.
So I hardly think that a few MD11 flight crews operating here on a relatively short term basis are creating the downfall of Canadian aviation as you'd like to lead people to believe.
As far as I'm concerned this thread is done to stir the pot.
C150,
This from the other forum you like to troll at:
So son, best of luck. When you\\\'ve a least passed grade 9 feel free to jump in with an EDUCATED argument. Otherwise save your school yard antics for recess.
Rosbif, I see you\\\'re in good company with C150.
Rosbif, wow, that's a witty comeback trying to come up with some lame derogatory "burn" on some user handles. Very nice - you must have done well on your debate team.
What you fail to see in the picture here is that this is business first. This is not a socialist "make-work" project for Canadians as you'd like to see.
If the job could be done by a Canadian company with Canadian pilots, great. If not (which is clearly the case) so be it. Should AC shut the program down because canucks aren't at the stick? I'm sure you'd love to see that.
This arrangement allows AC to test the cargo model with the desired aircraft type prior to bring it in house. I suppose you'd like to see AC go out purchase the aircraft, train the crews, invest in the infrastructure only to find that the model doesnt work. Or perhaps you'd like to see some other Canadian carrier go out, get the aircraft required, train the crews, only to have it disappear in a couple of years when AC takes it inhouse. And then what's to become of them with no contract or home for the aircraft?
You need to have a bit more vision and look further down the road son. Your myopic views are what cause short term gain and long term pain.
And Canadian pilots at a disadvantage? You need to stop feeling sorry for yourself. How many Canadians are flying abroad for carriers like Cathay, etc etc. Perhaps the Chinese should kick all of them out because they're foreigners.
So I hardly think that a few MD11 flight crews operating here on a relatively short term basis are creating the downfall of Canadian aviation as you'd like to lead people to believe.
As far as I'm concerned this thread is done to stir the pot.
C150,
This from the other forum you like to troll at:
Hey
Well like most of you guys know I\\\'m only 14 and trying to figure out what I should do for the future. What career path I should take. Tell me what you think?
Plan A
Try to get in Chicoutimi CEGEP in their \"Pilotage d\\\'aéronefs\" program(which I highly doubt Ill get in).
http://www.cegep-chicoutimi.qc.ca/
Plan B
Get in at John Abbott CEGEP in their Aircraft Maintenance program while getting all my ratings(Night-Multi-Commercial-CFI) at a local flight school.
http://www.johnabbott.qc.ca/cgi-bin/...intenanceE.htm
Should I go to university?
Well like most of you guys know I\\\'m only 14 and trying to figure out what I should do for the future. What career path I should take. Tell me what you think?
Plan A
Try to get in Chicoutimi CEGEP in their \"Pilotage d\\\'aéronefs\" program(which I highly doubt Ill get in).
http://www.cegep-chicoutimi.qc.ca/
Plan B
Get in at John Abbott CEGEP in their Aircraft Maintenance program while getting all my ratings(Night-Multi-Commercial-CFI) at a local flight school.
http://www.johnabbott.qc.ca/cgi-bin/...intenanceE.htm
Should I go to university?
So son, best of luck. When you\\\'ve a least passed grade 9 feel free to jump in with an EDUCATED argument. Otherwise save your school yard antics for recess.
Rosbif, I see you\\\'re in good company with C150.
Last edited by cargodawg; 24th May 2005 at 18:58.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: out of a suitcase
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My point, in case you missed it again, is that AC always gets what it wants. The reason that they can get cheap subcontractors to do their work is that Transport Canada takes a ridiculously long time to approve aircraft and operations. (partly the gist of this original thread) The result is that the same aircraft end up operating here on foreign flags.
Whether AC actually operates the 777's it has ordered on these exact routes remains to be seen, but I would think that if they can make money using the subcontractors they will delay and possibly deploy the 777s to other routes.
While it takes a very long time and a lot of money to get an operation or new aircraft type going in Canada, (ask Cargojet or ACE) it seems that all AC has to do is pick up the phone and they can operate any aircraft they want on any route they want on the grounds that no viable Canadian alternative exists.
You have not even started to address these arguments and attack the personalities instead.
Remember that this type of thing might not always be restricted to pure cargo ops. With recent agreements with US airways in the picture, and AC struggling to train sufficient numbers of pilots, I think that you will be coming over to my side of the agument when US carriers start doing AC's pax work.
Only time will tell if I am right, but by then it will be too late.
- And I am not your "son". Did they teach you to talk down to people like that on your AC captain's course?
Whether AC actually operates the 777's it has ordered on these exact routes remains to be seen, but I would think that if they can make money using the subcontractors they will delay and possibly deploy the 777s to other routes.
While it takes a very long time and a lot of money to get an operation or new aircraft type going in Canada, (ask Cargojet or ACE) it seems that all AC has to do is pick up the phone and they can operate any aircraft they want on any route they want on the grounds that no viable Canadian alternative exists.
You have not even started to address these arguments and attack the personalities instead.
Remember that this type of thing might not always be restricted to pure cargo ops. With recent agreements with US airways in the picture, and AC struggling to train sufficient numbers of pilots, I think that you will be coming over to my side of the agument when US carriers start doing AC's pax work.
Only time will tell if I am right, but by then it will be too late.
- And I am not your "son". Did they teach you to talk down to people like that on your AC captain's course?
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: canada
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rosbif. Well, where do I start? Unfortunately I don't think there's much hope here, but let me give it a try. First of all, it's not AC that gets its way with the government, rather it's the other way around. But since you're not an AC employee, I can understand your ignorance. All you have to do is look back at the forced merger with Canadian, and how Transport Canada is able to keep many inspectors employed to keep an eye on Big Red and let's not forget the Air Canada Act which unfairly restricts AC the way no other company is subjected to anywhere else in the world.
On the question of sub-contracting, you should know that this is a very normal and standard practice in this business. Zoom airlines has subcontracted a UK company to do some of its flying. It was really nice to see a UK registered airplane on our soil doing our flying. But then again Skyservice goes over to the UK and "takes jobs away from them", doing some of their flying. Canadian operators have a long history of flying overseas contracts, ie Natioair, Clubair, Skyservice etc etc. Air Canada pilots were not very amused when the company and our union failed to keep the cargo flying in-house. Suffice it to say that contract will soon be over and AC pilots will be doing that flying in the very near future. But again, it is a very normal practice and I honestly don't think that one foreign MD-11 will have a great impact on your future. I don't know if I have succeeded in showing you a bit of reality, but let me say that I do understand your frustration.
On the question of sub-contracting, you should know that this is a very normal and standard practice in this business. Zoom airlines has subcontracted a UK company to do some of its flying. It was really nice to see a UK registered airplane on our soil doing our flying. But then again Skyservice goes over to the UK and "takes jobs away from them", doing some of their flying. Canadian operators have a long history of flying overseas contracts, ie Natioair, Clubair, Skyservice etc etc. Air Canada pilots were not very amused when the company and our union failed to keep the cargo flying in-house. Suffice it to say that contract will soon be over and AC pilots will be doing that flying in the very near future. But again, it is a very normal practice and I honestly don't think that one foreign MD-11 will have a great impact on your future. I don't know if I have succeeded in showing you a bit of reality, but let me say that I do understand your frustration.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rosbif,
Unless AC's operating costs are completely out of line, AC will be able to do it inhouse far cheaper than by that provided by an ACMI operator.
As far as "cheap" goes, again, you need to understand the economics of it. The MD11 freighter is in extremely high demand right now (name me one operator that has one parked at the moment) so why would AC be getting some plum deal??? Supply/demand = Gemini/World/etc charging whatever the market will bear. They don't need to reduce the rate when they can deploy it anywhere.
Deal reached between Management and pilot group that will allow subcontract to operate for two years before coming in house. You are basing your whole position on personal assumptions and bais against AC.
So, with ACE operating (until recently) ex Cuba to central America, from EWR-BDA, and formerly in south east asia how is that not an issue to you??!!! So I guess it's okay for Canadians to operate 5th freedoms but not anyone else right?
I have no desire to make "personal attacks" but find it incredibly frustrating when uneducated/unfounded statements are made with the shear intent to stir a pot. Put together a half decent argument based on fact and I would be more than happy to argue it. I've yet to see any of that in your threads.
Or, as you already stated:
Based on the previous thread and C150s previous statement on his position, what jobs would it be that you two have? Paper routes? You can figure out your response at recess or over lunch between Leave it to Beaver and the Flintstones.
but I would think that if they can make money using the subcontractors they will delay and possibly deploy the 777s to other routes.
As far as "cheap" goes, again, you need to understand the economics of it. The MD11 freighter is in extremely high demand right now (name me one operator that has one parked at the moment) so why would AC be getting some plum deal??? Supply/demand = Gemini/World/etc charging whatever the market will bear. They don't need to reduce the rate when they can deploy it anywhere.
Whether AC actually operates the 777's it has ordered on these exact routes remains to be seen, but I would think that if they can make money using the subcontractors they will delay and possibly deploy the 777s to other routes.
That is how this game is played. It's all about getting the job done as cheaply as possible. That is why the Halifax 747 incident happened, and it is why our jobs are given away to whoever will do them cheapest.
I have no desire to make "personal attacks" but find it incredibly frustrating when uneducated/unfounded statements are made with the shear intent to stir a pot. Put together a half decent argument based on fact and I would be more than happy to argue it. I've yet to see any of that in your threads.
Or, as you already stated:
And for your information, both c150 and I have jobs and are not bitter in the slightest.
Last edited by cargodawg; 24th May 2005 at 18:57.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: canada
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boy, you guys is good...when I graduate, I hope to be as smart as you!
It\'s very easy to get you all "fired up"...maybe that\'s why I do it (I have nothing else to do until I start delivering papers at 4:30!)
It\'s very easy to get you all "fired up"...maybe that\'s why I do it (I have nothing else to do until I start delivering papers at 4:30!)
Guest
Posts: n/a
Well C150. Once again you've just proved what you really are. Your only purpose on this forum is not to provide intelligent debate or help others in getting usefull info. No. You just enjoy getting people "fired up". I guess that's easy to do in an anonimous forum, I wonder if you would be the same if we all knew your true identity. If you work as a professional pilot, I suggest you don't reveal this to your employer. You also might stand to lose your medical because of your condition. If you don't yet work in this industry, you might whant to consider seeking professional help to overcome this problem of yours before getting in. You know, I hear that AC might be using psyke analysis to screen potential candidates.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: canada
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If AC is using Psych analysis, I am definitely in trouble!
C'mon guys...lighten up a little...if you don't enjoy it then why respond?
As for intelligent debate, I've never been known to exhibit much intelligence
C'mon guys...lighten up a little...if you don't enjoy it then why respond?
As for intelligent debate, I've never been known to exhibit much intelligence
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
c150,
Can't speak for anyone else, but I take my career and my livelihood seriously and not about to allow anyone to take pot shots at it without an fight.
I believe there is a humour forum if that's the sole intent of your posts.
Maybe when you have a career, a family, mortgage, bills, responsibilities, etc you'll appreciate what I'm saying.
Can't speak for anyone else, but I take my career and my livelihood seriously and not about to allow anyone to take pot shots at it without an fight.
I believe there is a humour forum if that's the sole intent of your posts.
Maybe when you have a career, a family, mortgage, bills, responsibilities, etc you'll appreciate what I'm saying.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: canada
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cargodawg...perhaps you take yourself too seriously...I don't recall taking any pot shots at you. I believe that if you look at your previous posts, you will notice yourself insulting others and talking down to them...that is not what I would call intelligent debate....Please leave Beaver and the Flintstones out of this, they did nothing to harm you.