




Mayfly wrote:I want a pay rise



Mayfly wrote:I want a pay rise





Code monkey wrote:Mayfly wrote:I want a pay rise
Take a 10% rise, Pam, you deserve it!
Now, let me see....... 10% x nothing = .................................!!


RLN wrote:Did you say we can take the rise out of MF by an extra 10%?


Mayfly wrote:No need to duck HH unless TDC sees you have called him an 'Annoying Little blue clad Menace'

Xplumberlives wrote:Sooty655 wrote:Xplumberlives wrote:All very good points, but you just know that someone will come online soon and decry what has been posted!
And what makes Iconic worthwhile is that they won't be moderated away, even though they think we should be.
Wonderful Sooty, let's hope you're correct!








Mayfly wrote:You owe me!!!


Mayfly wrote:This Thread has been edited after discussion by the Mods & at the request of the original poster - THERE ARE ONLY 4 EDITS. 2 by the original poster & two containing quotes or highlights.
I hope this stance is acceptable to all & in keeping with IA's policy.
Mayfly





Gully wrote:Waddington - I know this will frustrate the Lincolnshire contingent, but it's old news that's happened and cannot be changed. From what I know, it was fairly and squarely a third party foul-up and there was nothing VTTS could have done that would have changed the situation. One employs expert subbies, but sometimes they get it wrong - sure CF knows the scenario all too well. The big lesson was in respect of communication, not engineering.

Gully wrote:Za150 - I believe that the change at the top of the Trustees will have the impact you allude to: a more commercial animal in charge now, as far as I understand.
I do so hope you are correct, Gully, but I still feel that ZA's idea would go a long way to restoring confidence (or proving the doubters right!).
CG - sorry, but I'm not at liberty to break confidences of committee to discuss what options the Club has been exploring to ensure we are well-placed for whatever the future brings. You of all people should know though that with some of the 'characters' on the committee we're not sitting back idly waiting for something to happen!
Would you be one such 'character' perhaps, Mr Gully??!!![]()
Waddington - I know this will frustrate the Lincolnshire contingent, but it's old news that's happened and cannot be changed. From what I know, it was fairly and squarely a third party foul-up and there was nothing VTTS could have done that would have changed the situation. One employs expert subbies, but sometimes they get it wrong - sure CF knows the scenario all too well. The big lesson was in respect of communication, not engineering.
It may be old news but it has had a highly negative effect that continues to be felt in terms of public support locally. Sooty's point is well made with regards to the main contractor having to 'fess up for the errors/omissions of a 'subbie'. Again, I can only hope that the lesson really HAS been learnt on this one.
Gully
PS. Thanks for the Moderating, MF!




Oberon wrote:Oh by the Way Sooty655, it was refreshing to have you and your mates thank TVOC for giving you about a tons worth of Avionic spares to get 655 up to speed.............. oh, damn, I forget, ...... you didn't. But don't let that get in the way of you having yet another slap at us.

Oberon wrote: Bubbles & his wannabee mates can continue to polish panels on Teasin Tina and paint propellors on other grounded aircraft, but I feel that in no way, are they qualified to speak ill on subjects of which they have such scant knowledge, seemingly from a position of strength, without having full facts at their disposal.


Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests