Originally Posted by
Hornet1
I have been trying to wrap my small brain around the PS change. As I understand it it is a one for one swap of PS for fixed pay at 100%. Meaning in no scenario are we going to be paid less if the TA passes than if it doesn't. If you are saying that our pay raise of 8/0/3/3 is not enough I understand (and agree with you) but exchanging 5.74% max profit sharing for 5.74% fixed pay going forward is not a "loss" of PS it actually locks it in every year going forward.
Now, I have a long list of issues with this TA and likely voting no but please help me understand why this change in the way we get paid is bad.
If you run the numbers it is a raise, even though the Bloomberg types are saying the ps changes mean it saves the company money.
8033 is a way of saying it ain't 8633 as we know it. I think I did the math the other day and it was like a 5k difference to go 8633 plus c12k ps and 1% more on 401k. But I'll double check that.