I think our SL program is better than yours.

OUR Profit Sharing went down and is lower than yours. We have the same idea as yours with 10% for a portion and then 20%, but we agreed to have the higher portion based on a profit Margin number rather than a specific dollar amount, so as total revenue went up so did the amount of profit we had to achieve to get the higher payout. I think with our formula your guys profit sharing payout would have been about 75% of what it was for 2014. So, our current program would be ever so slightly above what your TA program is proposing.

From what I have seen, the give in the area of Scope is the much bigger deal. While that would take you down to what we have, it looks like a major give to me. To give you an idea of how bad it can be, we currently have a Lufthansa A380 flying LAX-FRA, a 747-800 flying LAX-FRA, and an A340 flying LAX-MUC and we don't have any metal on either of those routes!!!!

So, while we have swallowed that pill already to get past the merger mess that we were in, I would not recommend it. I was really hoping to get our scope up to your level in the next contract because this area translates into the Widebody Jobs!

Ironically, we have a major campaign going on to stop the MiddleEast carriers from "stealing" our work, but I guess it is ok to give our jobs away if the company is going to get the revenue.

I realize the payrates are quite nice with your TA and that makes it very tempting, but unless you are really senior and don't care about the Widebody jobs, you definitely should get as much info on that Joint Venture/Scope give to make sure what your total benefit/cost is when you consider the potential loss of Jobs up the food chain and the associated lack of movement. Higher pay but a lack of movement may end up resulting in similar or worse W2 than lower pay but good movement.