Originally Posted by
shiznit
C2015, its coming soon. What is the value of a 15% (future 16-17% maybe?) DC do to a "restoration" equation... I'd like to hear no holds barred thoughts. I find it a very interesting topic because of the extremely different situations and perspectives that come from the seniority/age/merger spectrum.
For a pilot hired in the 07-present, Johnso/me/ACL it's probably way better than the old DB/nonqual plans.
For the 98-2002 hires, like Check and Gloopy is it marginally better depending on age, or still worse?
For 91-97 like DAL88 etc. (and gzsg?) it probably isn't even close enough or "just barely almost" when claim/note/equity/frozen/PBGC are factored in and you are a near perfect investor??
For 88-91 guys (Denny, Carl) is there not enough time to fix it no matter what the 401k percentage?
How do we quantify that, and since it will vary wildly depending on demographic what is the value towards a stance of "restoration"?
Shiznit
Given Delta's profitability there is not doubt we can make gains across the board. It is difficult with such a large pilot group to make major shifts for the reason you mentioned. Each seniority group/age has different priorities.
I don't think we will change our retirement system. I do think moving past the UAL 16% is easily doable.
I was hired in 1985. Older pilots don't have that many years to catch up, but the are getting 15% of a higher number generally speaking.
We will make other gains across the board in min day, value of a vacation/training day, per diem, medical, number of vacation days and that is critical.
The one area where we must make a large step forward is our hourly pay rates. IMO we must exceed the 2004 Delta pilot rates at date of signing or we have failed. The line pilots have been clear and unequivocal. They have said it over and over and over.
Our executives are doing a great job and in return their compensation is up 300% to 700% since bankruptcy. For us to hit 20% plus date of signing is more than fair and easily doable. For us to make hourly rates that are over a decade old is more than fair.
I have to agree with Carl. Our admin and a few others will do anything to ensure we don't get the 2004 rates date of signing. Our MEC for the most part, will fight for these gains.
We will repeat 2012? Will the MEC be in control or the admin?
Hoping for the best.
Jerry