Register free!
Search
 
     

The Green Industry's Resource Center


Click for Weather
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-28-2007, 08:20 PM
mcwlandscaping's Avatar
mcwlandscaping mcwlandscaping is offline
LawnSite Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Nashua, NH
Posts: 3,169
!@#$%^ flying.....

Read that article last night at the beginning of the recent issue of the N.E. TURF, and man, that sounds rough!!! I wouldn't be flying again after all the Sh** he went through!!! Your thoughts?
__________________

Summer Setup

Ford Trucks
PJ Trailers
JD & Wright Equipment/Mowers
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-28-2007, 08:49 PM
LindblomRJ's Avatar
LindblomRJ LindblomRJ is offline
LawnSite Silver Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Rapid City, South Dakota
Posts: 2,577
What a tale of woe. Good article. David seems write good editorials. Makes me glad I don't fly that often. Granted I have spent ample time driving.
__________________
Ryan
Spring Creek Lawn & Landscape

Veritas and æquitas
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-03-2007, 11:59 AM
TurfEditor TurfEditor is offline
Group Publisher
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: St. Johnsbury, VT
Posts: 135
MCW -

Believe me --- if I didn't have to fly, I wouldn't. Being able to travel by air is just part of doing business now. it's not a matter of choice for millions of people.

That's why though I am usually a pretty fundamental Libertarian when it comes to most issues (ie. keep the government out of EVERYTHING except the narrowly defined responsibilities set out in the Constitution), i think this is one of the times when the interstate commerce clauses absolutely Do apply, and they should step in and make the airlines do the right thing. Actually, I'd rather see a HUGE class action lawsuit. Even though I'm not the kind who runs to the courts every time I stub my toe, I think we are justified to seek compensation from a company that 1) sells us something they don't have (overbooking of flights) 2) claims no liability when they lose or destroy our property (baggage issues) 3) holds us against our will for hours (boarding flights that have been delayed for multiple hours).

Either way - the airlines aren't going to change until they they are made to feel a little pain.

You're lucky you don't have to fly that much.

DC
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-03-2007, 11:17 PM
txgrassguy's Avatar
txgrassguy txgrassguy is offline
LawnSite Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: south enough that spanish is necessary
Posts: 3,093
For a while I too had to fly on aircraft for a living.
I was exempt from security screening, pre 9-11 as a result of my federal employment, the only downside being I couldn't drink alcohol on the plane.
I have since left federal employment and have had the occasion to fly three times since 9-11.
Unless I absolutely have to, I won't fly again.
Just as a side note, if you think it is bad in the US, try the freakin' Philippines.
You are searched, patted down, your bags are physically searched, the whole process takes over three hours just to board the plane.
I was on a new Boeing 757 flying from Manila to Cebu and couldn't help but notice the over head baggage compartment had detached from the inside of the fuselage. Three months later I have to fly again, it is the same plane and the baggage compartment is still dangling.
The flight crew's attitude, at least it is on the inside of the aircraft.
People wonder why now I drive everywhere.
__________________
Nice Try = You Suck Spelled Differently
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1998 - 2012, LawnSite.com™ - Moose River Media
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:37 PM.

Page generated in 0.07209 seconds with 7 queries