Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
01-28-2015, 02:30 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,108
AA 1/1/16
MD 80/88 AA $235 DAL $206 difference 14%
787 AA $293 DAL $259 difference 13%
MD 80/88 AA $235 DAL $206 difference 14%
787 AA $293 DAL $259 difference 13%
01-28-2015, 03:02 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2009
Position: right for a long, long time
Posts: 2,642
Originally Posted by gzsg
You are dreaming if you think RA is going anywhere near the increases you wish for in a profit sharing trade. Touching one penny of profit sharing will result in self funding increases we would get anyway.
Do you have knowledge about what RA thinks or would do(unless y'all are buddies and talk shop over beers I doubt it), but thanks for speculating, hey I mean you could be right, you could be wrong.
Gee, I really hope Carl doesn't come crashing in with a "You have no idea what RA cares about. None. You're a line pilot gzsg. A line pilot." like he did to sailing, but somehow I don't think he will.
Here's the part of the post you must have missed/skipped over.
I DO NOT agree with changing PS into payrates and calling it a raise. Would we like C2015 raises, THEN a PS change that goes on top of that? Maybe, gotta see the math on what we get for it...
01-28-2015, 03:17 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2009
Position: right for a long, long time
Posts: 2,642
Originally Posted by gzsg
AA 1/1/16
MD 80/88 AA $235 DAL $206 difference 14%
787 AA $293 DAL $259 difference 13%
MD 80/88 AA $235 DAL $206 difference 14%
787 AA $293 DAL $259 difference 13%
...and using our 2015 rates versus their 2016 rates...
got it.
01-28-2015, 03:28 AM
Looking for a laugh
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,099
Originally Posted by gzsg
AA 1/1/16
MD 80/88 AA $235 DAL $206 difference 14%
787 AA $293 DAL $259 difference 13%
MD 80/88 AA $235 DAL $206 difference 14%
787 AA $293 DAL $259 difference 13%
Originally Posted by shiznit
You're referencing the TA that their pilots are considering, but haven't accepted, right?
...and using our 2015 rates versus their 2016 rates...
got it.
...and using our 2015 rates versus their 2016 rates...
got it.
01-28-2015, 03:37 AM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Originally Posted by sailingfun
Other then the forum here or DPA where exactly are you seeing these trial balloons?
What I want to know is whether transferring from variable to less variable, will the end result be a W2 increase or would a higher pay rate be considered such a win that a W2 decrease is found acceptable?
Last edited by forgot to bid; 01-28-2015 at 03:52 AM.
01-28-2015, 03:53 AM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
Originally Posted by shiznit
Timbo, thanks... Wouldn't have seen Carl's comment otherwise; he's correct on one point, right now no one has a choice (nobody at DAL is negotiating anything related to Section 6 right now). It may never happen, but it's worth considering from a purely mathematical standpoint.
I DO NOT agree with changing PS into payrates and calling it a raise. Would we like C2015 raises, THEN a PS change that goes on top of that? Maybe, gotta see the math on what we get for it...
Do I like having as much of my income at risk, and DELAYED by more than a YEAR to be paid....No, I do not like that.
The Company can "share" a bigger chunk of those "profits" with me in my bi-monthly paychecks. I'd rather get paid NOW, get the extra 15% in my 401k NOW; use that money to make more money NOW. I'd rather not let the Company sit on our money for a year to earn the interest we could have made.
We get it.. Carl is bad at finance (thank God he still has his 747 Captain pension). He thinks it's a good idea to let someone else keep part of our paychecks every month, and delay more of our money going in our 401k plans sooner.
Timbo, why you think he should "preach it" is lost on me...
I DO NOT agree with changing PS into payrates and calling it a raise. Would we like C2015 raises, THEN a PS change that goes on top of that? Maybe, gotta see the math on what we get for it...
Do I like having as much of my income at risk, and DELAYED by more than a YEAR to be paid....No, I do not like that.
The Company can "share" a bigger chunk of those "profits" with me in my bi-monthly paychecks. I'd rather get paid NOW, get the extra 15% in my 401k NOW; use that money to make more money NOW. I'd rather not let the Company sit on our money for a year to earn the interest we could have made.
We get it.. Carl is bad at finance (thank God he still has his 747 Captain pension). He thinks it's a good idea to let someone else keep part of our paychecks every month, and delay more of our money going in our 401k plans sooner.
Timbo, why you think he should "preach it" is lost on me...
Your point is well taken, and most economists would agree, that letting someone hold on to your money instead of you is ill-advised. With that said, in the case of profit sharing, I'm okay with that. It's an accrual system and maxes out most 401k's in one fell swoop. The only thing I'd consider swapping SOME profit sharing for is if the company maxes out my 401k to the 415c limit - without my involvement.
I'm not Timbo. He's a tool.
01-28-2015, 03:55 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2009
Position: right for a long, long time
Posts: 2,642
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
Atlanta crewroom last week with some sort of DALPA meet and greet. Already posted it.
It's additional input, maybe one or more of those the pilots said they didn't do the survey, so when PS topic was brought up the rep asked him directly! ..but it is possible that it was a trial balloon when you heard it in passing.
Can't know the real story unless you were there for the whole conversation or had your own conversation with said reps. Anecdotal bits don't cut it.
01-28-2015, 03:59 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2009
Position: right for a long, long time
Posts: 2,642
Originally Posted by scambo1
What he is preaching is pay rates and profit sharing are decoupled (separate line items) right now and I agree with that.
Your point is well taken, and most economists would agree, that letting someone hold on to your money instead of you is ill-advised. With that said, in the case of profit sharing, I'm okay with that. It's an accrual system and maxes out most 401k's in one fell swoop. The only thing I'd consider swapping SOME profit sharing for is if the company maxes out my 401k to the 415c limit - without my involvement.
I'm not Timbo. He's a tool.
Your point is well taken, and most economists would agree, that letting someone hold on to your money instead of you is ill-advised. With that said, in the case of profit sharing, I'm okay with that. It's an accrual system and maxes out most 401k's in one fell swoop. The only thing I'd consider swapping SOME profit sharing for is if the company maxes out my 401k to the 415c limit - without my involvement.
I'm not Timbo. He's a tool.
Timbo, scambo... Po-tay-to, po-tah-to!
01-28-2015, 04:03 AM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
I hope Leo stayed in his house in Nantucket this week.
01-28-2015, 04:15 AM
Runs with scissors
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Going to hell in a bucket, but enjoying the ride .
Posts: 7,722
Originally Posted by scambo1
I hope Leo stayed in his house in Nantucket this week.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
