Originally Posted by
hockeypilot44
How about the fact that I make 3 percent (I think that percent is correct) less in retirement right now than my fDAL brothers. I have no pension as I was hired well after the targeting crap took place. Couple this with the above post and the fact that reserves are paid less per trip than line holders; I feel like a "B" scale pilot.
Here is an issue I can wrap my brain around, and agree with one hundred %. I am philoshically opposed to any tweaking of any DC rates, as I said elsewhere. The minute you try your hand at social engineering on this issue is the minute you wipe out any hint of unity or fairness for at least one important aspect of the contract.
We on the S side lived briefly with an infamy called "the Matrix", a pre-BK piece designed to supplement our (then) frozen retirement. Based on expectations, not LOS. You had guys in the same class getting 6% and 18, the older getting more. Luckily, this was fixed (for all of us).
I for one don't think it is right to subsidize the career choices of another pilot. If someone started at Delta older, it's for reasons that are strictly particular to their life. Maybe those reasons come with a second retirement?
I don't have the specifics of your situation, and I don't what retirement, if any, you have, but on philosphical grounds, I agree with you that we cannot have two people getting different DC rates. Different DC net contributions because of seat of equipment, absolutely. But no different rates.
Now, here is a post that makes another valid philosphical point, but still deserves a BS flag, IMO:
I will vote no to any TA that doesn't fix the anniversary pay date for FNWA guys. I'm sure this is news to some, NWA pay anniversaries are started when the 1st person in your new-hire class was released to the line from IOE. Every new-hire in that class was then tagged with this date as their pay anniversary date. That is pretty much across the board a 3 month period.
If the PWA/JCBA doesn't address this specifically, then obviously, your anniversary date should match our policy. Clearly your argument is morally correct, and your point is fair.
But when you say you won't vote for
any contract that doesn't have that provision, I think you're a) lying, or b) being just a bit overdramatic. If a contract could contain all the big picture items we as agroup strive for, we should vote for it. I started this thread to see what consensus might exist as to what people want, and because the "Latest & Greatest" thread was becoming a [I'll delete it myself, thank you]. I didn't do it to appease single-issue pet-peeve voters. I'm not even sure this will identify all the important picture items, or if any of this will matter. But it's worth a shot. So, if you really have to have your three months, and nothing else matters, then you're not interested in my issues, or in the big issues that the majority could identify, and push through.
With that being said, welcome to APC, and welcome to this discussion.