Originally Posted by
Reroute
(originally posted by TheManager)I never made any statements about the claim. You did. I will say nice job on DALPA's part, but they were almost too singularly focused on that.
The claim was compensation for the concessions. The concessions were for a 3.5 year period and were valued at $280m/year. The claim paid out over $1.2B in cash for those concessions and they paid out almost immediately after bankruptcy. I think I'd rather have the money up front then a snap back, particularly when it never snaps back.
Well, I guess it depends on how you look at it. You are correct that the claim was
officially for concessions. However, most of the money went into our retirement accounts, not our paychecks. For me personally, the claim and note gave enough of a boost to my retirement that I am on a pretty good track there. However, it has done nothing for my income, which has a purchasing power about HALF of what it should be.
I'm grateful for the boost to help get my retirement back on track. But to paint it as a substitute for a snap back, making whole our overall compensation, I think is very inaccurate and misleading... in a similar way to how LM's latest letter was misleading.