Originally Posted by
Sink r8
I disagree. I was very alert to any double-counting in the road-show, and they were careful to be very explicit. I think they should refer to it as a partial, fixed PS conversion, because it's what it is. It's also good insurance in a downturn.
The PTIX definition change is proof they feel they have the leverage in an early negotiation, and is an irritant, but you're not correct that the conversion is being "sold as a pay increase".
As long as no one is double-counting, I actually think this is going to be an easy math exercise for most people. My #1 concern, by far, on the PS, was that the upside be protected in case Jerry is right (he's not an idiot). I like the fact we have protection if he's wrong (because Jerry doesn't know the future).
OK then, the question you have to ask is this: Do believe that a downturn during the term of this agreement is likely in this industry? If you do, then you are correct, that the conversion is the right thing to do.
Or, do you believe that DAL is the best positioned in the industry, coupled with a 3 year deal makes the concern for a near term downturn a bit premature. I'll go with door number 2.
And in all the literature I read and all the highlight hitting paper, I see pay raises of 8/6/3/3. Where is the additional 5.74% conversion from profit sharing if it is not included in those numbers which are being sold as pay raises? There should be an additional number in there somewhere.
And since they are only doing road shows in major hubs, I will guess I have to take your word on what they are saying, but I can do math and there is double counting going on. I didn't even have to take my shoes off to figure that one out.