Originally Posted by
DeadHead
If, hypothetically, we were to be approached by a TA (similar to AMR) that removed profit sharing altogether, what kind of pay percentage increase would you consider to be sufficient?
I realize this is an extreme scenario, but clearly you believe we should have profit sharing taken into account directly through compensation which would eliminate downturn risk. It's certainly a valid point, but it is extremely important to quantify that amount so we can say definitely that we conceded profit sharing (based on $XX billion profit) for a XX% compensation increase.
Profit Sharing is a persistent remnant of the post bankruptcy concessionary contract. It is itself a concession. You're narrative where profit sharing can only be "conceded" in exchange for pay rates is the formula for failure.
A value can be assigned to almost anything. Further everything has intrinsic (tangible) and implied (foreseeable) value. In my opinion in the next 2-4 weeks both of those values with respect to profit sharing will never be exceeded. With the value of profit sharing so high I would not even consider negotiating it away for ONLY pay rates. But I believe there will never be another time to hand it back to management with a polite "No Thank You" and add more value to our contract overall.
We could negotiate a contract where we add to already improved contract provisions in Scope, Vacation, Sick, 401K match and Pay Rates without returning Profit Sharing to management.
Or,
We can negotiate a contract where we add even MORE to already improved contract provisions in Scope, Vacation, Sick, 401K match and Pay Rates returning Profit Sharing to management.
Which scenario do you embrace?