JP Morgan's analysis of the TA
#61
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,224
What you wrote above is not correct. Our profits sharing formulas are different.
United's 10%/20% split is at 6.9% operating margin. Ours is at $2.5 Billion of pre-tax income. If our companies were smaller and more profitable, your formula would be better. But they aren't. As revenue size increases, given the same operating margin, the Delta formula gradually gets better and better. At our current size and and for a similar level of profitability the Delta formula is about 30% better. Because we are a more profitable company, it is slightly better than that.
United's 10%/20% split is at 6.9% operating margin. Ours is at $2.5 Billion of pre-tax income. If our companies were smaller and more profitable, your formula would be better. But they aren't. As revenue size increases, given the same operating margin, the Delta formula gradually gets better and better. At our current size and and for a similar level of profitability the Delta formula is about 30% better. Because we are a more profitable company, it is slightly better than that.
#62
What you wrote above is not correct. Our profits sharing formulas are different.
United's 10%/20% split is at 6.9% operating margin. Ours is at $2.5 Billion of pre-tax income. If our companies were smaller and more profitable, your formula would be better. But they aren't. As revenue size increases, given the same operating margin, the Delta formula gradually gets better and better. At our current size and and for a similar level of profitability the Delta formula is about 30% better. Because we are a more profitable company, it is slightly better than that.
United's 10%/20% split is at 6.9% operating margin. Ours is at $2.5 Billion of pre-tax income. If our companies were smaller and more profitable, your formula would be better. But they aren't. As revenue size increases, given the same operating margin, the Delta formula gradually gets better and better. At our current size and and for a similar level of profitability the Delta formula is about 30% better. Because we are a more profitable company, it is slightly better than that.
Sunvox
#63
This is going to be a slam dunk. Will there be a few surprises, most likely after all we are pilots. The guys yelling NO right now are mostly just hedging their future "see!! I am so much smarter than you, do the math, I did the math" .....blah blah blah....
This will pass huge and quick!!
This will pass huge and quick!!
#65
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: A320 Cap
Posts: 2,282
Not true. May want to check the pay rates on APC under United. Add 7.56% to the current rates to see what our Jan rate will be if this TA passes.
Sorry to interject, but you should really fact check. Unless you are just talking DOS - Jan 1st.
747/350/777/787/764
CA
2017 $328
2018 $338
2019 $351
FO
2017 $224
2018 $231
2019 $240
Your Airbus will be about $10 below us as well. Just saying.
Sorry to interject, but you should really fact check. Unless you are just talking DOS - Jan 1st.
747/350/777/787/764
CA
2017 $328
2018 $338
2019 $351
FO
2017 $224
2018 $231
2019 $240
Your Airbus will be about $10 below us as well. Just saying.
The merits of the DAL TA are for them to decide, and I wish them well.
#66
He was spot on correct. How many times did you read "it's not about the money!" (except when that was immediately followed by "don't touch my PS" so evidently it WAS about the money to some extent).
The negotiators got you untouched PS even with the shareholders irritated over the highest PS payout in corporate US history (which the perpetual "just say no" crowd dismisses with a petulant little "hmmmph!").
The negotiators got you a lot more money.
There are few to no concessions here.
The toxic LCA carveouts (which "no concessions" UAL have in abundance) were eliminated.
PS remains pensionable, unlike "no concessions" UAL.
I really don't know what the just-say-no crowd is all up in arms about, other than the fact that voting no is just fun. I doubt half of them could even tell you why they would vote no, and I doubt ANY of them actually WANT a TA that they would vote in favor of, short of something worth the entire GNP of the USA (and they would probably find fault with that).
The negotiators got you untouched PS even with the shareholders irritated over the highest PS payout in corporate US history (which the perpetual "just say no" crowd dismisses with a petulant little "hmmmph!").
The negotiators got you a lot more money.
There are few to no concessions here.
The toxic LCA carveouts (which "no concessions" UAL have in abundance) were eliminated.
PS remains pensionable, unlike "no concessions" UAL.
I really don't know what the just-say-no crowd is all up in arms about, other than the fact that voting no is just fun. I doubt half of them could even tell you why they would vote no, and I doubt ANY of them actually WANT a TA that they would vote in favor of, short of something worth the entire GNP of the USA (and they would probably find fault with that).
#67
Runs with scissors
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Going to hell in a bucket, but enjoying the ride .
Posts: 7,722
#68
Snake
Thread Starter
Joined APC: May 2015
Posts: 242
From taprocon.com:
OE Rotation Removal
No changes to PBS
Codifies when and how much Open Time the company can withhold for training
No changes to 23G5, nor does it limit pilot ability to pick up extra time after being removed
See Language and TAprocon.com Flowchart for more detail
OE Rotation Removal
No changes to PBS
Codifies when and how much Open Time the company can withhold for training
No changes to 23G5, nor does it limit pilot ability to pick up extra time after being removed
See Language and TAprocon.com Flowchart for more detail
#69
From what I can tell, almost all the teeth from the OE pull have been... pulled. It's very limited use vs a large game changer from the failure last year.
#70
This will be very difficult to monitor and you may never know which trips you could have or should have been awarded.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post