|
I think our bonus structure is incredibly mundane. Profit Sharing is such a bore. How about we get rid of profit sharing payouts to each pilot, and instead we put 1/10th of the net profit sharing into a big pot that a few lucky pilots can win? Like a lottery! How exciting!
Imagine if you won the grand prize of $50 million🎩! Wow! Or 2nd place with a shinyyy new Cirrus SR22 🛩! 10 lucky pilots would get consolation prizes of a sporty Mazda Miata 🚘! Imagine rollin' up to the employee lot in that? Or trade in your winnings for the rights to the Mystery Box🔮! Is it suitcases full of cash? Deeds to PTC/Park City mansions? Maybe a Boat? All of the above? - I'm Scott Kirby, and I approve of this message. |
Originally Posted by saturn
(Post 2914355)
I think our bonus structure is incredibly mundane. Profit Sharing is such a bore. How about we get rid of profit sharing payouts to each pilot, and instead we put 1/10th of the net profit sharing into a big pot that a few lucky pilots can win? Like a lottery! How exciting!
Imagine if you won the grand prize of $50 million🎩! Wow! Or 2nd place with a shinyyy new Cirrus SR22 🛩! 10 lucky pilots would get consolation prizes of a sporty Mazda Miata 🚘! Imagine rollin' up to the employee lot on that? Or trade in you're winnings for the rights to the Mystery Box🔮! Is it suitcases full of cash? Deeds to PTC/Park City mansions? Maybe a Boat? All of the above? - I'm Scott Kirby, and I approve of this message. |
Originally Posted by gzsg
(Post 2914315)
All of our positions are very reasonable.
The usual suspects hate that they lost control and are now trying to paint our leaders in a negative light to deliver the Delta pilots for less to management for a pat on the head. Same stuff, different day. Our leaders are doing a perfect job. This is by far the best negotiating environment in our history and we have outstanding negotiators. The beat way to succeed is to support them 100%. Don’t let a vocal handful destroy your future. Scope is everything for our new pilots. We couldn’t have a better scope chairman. |
Originally Posted by theUpsideDown
(Post 2914333)
I like how you go all cynical and then do the exact thing you bash the others for.
All I ask for is pilots taking the side of pilots. That includes looking at this from every angle. If you go accusing every pilot who disagrees with your brand of cheerleading a management goon you're gonna find yourself pretty alone under that tent. Our MEC chairman and MEC have provided clear and constant communication. Couldn’t be better in my opinion. I believe I am in a majority of over 14,000. How many in the haters club in your opinion ? 30? 50? |
Originally Posted by gzsg
(Post 2914387)
I support our negotiators 100%.
Our MEC chairman and MEC have provided clear and constant communication. Couldn’t be better in my opinion. I believe I am in a majority of over 14,000. How many in the haters club in your opinion ? 30? 50? |
First of all I hope gzsg is right. But I hate to say I’m feeling pretty cynical about what will be achieved and how long it will take.
Denny |
Originally Posted by Denny Crane
(Post 2914402)
First of all I hope gzsg is right. But I hate to say I’m feeling pretty cynical about what will be achieved and how long it will take.
Denny |
Originally Posted by GliderCFI
(Post 2914351)
Better yet, just make the amendable date July 1 instead of January. Then put a pill in the contract that prevents the company from issuing premium pay after the amendable date. Some gonna gripe they can't make it rain all summer, but what percentage of legs operated on the summer are done on premium pay? It would take 48 hours to have one helluva deal.
|
Originally Posted by gzsg
(Post 2914387)
I support our negotiators 100%.
Our MEC chairman and MEC have provided clear and constant communication. Couldn’t be better in my opinion. I believe I am in a majority of over 14,000. How many in the haters club in your opinion ? 30? 50? I've been very pleased with the communication efforts from this MEC, both regarding the negotiations and more day to day stuff. However, regarding the "hater club" which group are you referring to? The TA1 "we'll never get another cent" group, or the Chit Chat "where every day is a rainy day" crowd that honestly thought TA2 would be rejected as well. Both groups exist, and both are wrong. |
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 2914483)
How exactly do you think you will get the company to agree to that?
|
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 2914483)
How exactly do you think you will get the company to agree to that?
As people have said...."unprecedented good times"...."NO gives"...."the company can afford it"...yada..yada..yada This is not a negotiation....they are "our demands, by God!!" The MEC will just tell them....problem solved What could possibly go wrong? |
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 2914478)
I like what GZSG says about supporting the MEC leadership and how he applied that concept to past MEC’s. Opps, maybe not a good example!
|
Originally Posted by Herkflyr
(Post 2914488)
I actually want to agree with you. I support our MEC, MEC Chair and Negotiators.
I've been very pleased with the communication efforts from this MEC, both regarding the negotiations and more day to day stuff. However, regarding the "hater club" which group are you referring to? The TA1 "we'll never get another cent" group, or the Chit Chat "where every day is a rainy day" crowd that honestly thought TA2 would be rejected as well. Both groups exist, and both are wrong. DAL South ALPA was historically very pusillanimous and mostly acquiescing. DAL North ALPA was historically very militant and mostly confrontational. Both can be fine tactics when applied to a specific situation. Neither is very good when used as an overall long term strategy. DALPA (South mindset) pushed TA-1 like it was the best TA ever. Very naive and shortsighted and proven totally wrong. DALPA (North mindset) mostly came out against TA-2 and was pushing for a rejection. In my opinion almost as foolish as the TA-1 debacle described above. We can never know for sure what would have happened (except for maybe Sarah Conner :D) alternate history and all, but we do know this for a fact - The Pilots overwhelmingly approved it. ** So now we have two extreme factions or tribes vying for control of DALPA. It seems both sides would rather see the other side fail instead of the Pilot group succeeding. ** Note this does not mean 82% of the Pilot group approves of (insert PWA turd here) but rather 82% of the Pilot group weighed both the Pros and Cons and decided in favor. Scoop |
Originally Posted by GliderCFI
(Post 2914349)
Why? Everyone should be likely maxing out the legal limit as it is after about 3 years on property. Increasing the percentage is basically just a raise in the check. Negotiate that on rates, unless the entire goal of increasing retirement is just boosting W2. I suspect a large issue for many going into retirement isn't so much the money available or coming in, it's the health care money going out. For civilian guys, a commitment to max the HSA and pay premiums to age 67 might be nice. Military guys have other options, but also many have mil pensions to supplement too. Though I'll admit to being fairly ignorant as to how those work, and with Tricare etc.
The only thing that's certain here is that time is not on our side. If the economy is trending downward, while those who would most likely sell something else for pension type restoration move rapidly toward non voting position in retirement, being replaced by young guys whose 401k's would (in theory) be well loaded after 30 years of compounding interest.....seems all the company has to do is drag their feet and wait us out. For that reason, I wonder if a short term deal would be a better way to go. Just get something for guys on the way out, with an annual rate increase at the amendable date, and put either a contractual block on green slip flying after the amendable date, or a blank every pick up is premium pay after the amendable date. Easier said than done, but allows the company to kick it down the road while touting harmony, protects more of the guys retiring...and sets us up for massive gains when retirements peak. Like I mentioned, I acknowledge I know little in the large scale workings of a lot of this. |
Originally Posted by Scoop
(Post 2914522)
So now we have two extreme factions or tribes vying for control of DALPA. It seems both sides would rather see the other side fail instead of the Pilot group succeeding.
|
Originally Posted by Kjazz130
(Post 2914539)
The purpose of increasing the DC contribution is to max out at date of hire. The value of the money in the account earlier is important. And I think far fewer are maxing out at year 3 then you think. I’m at year 4 and I’m not. I have two kids getting ready to go to college so I have other expenses that keep me from maxing out. So I would appreciate an increase and I’m sure there are others that would as well. Also, if everyone’s 401k is increased maybe people would retire earlier. I think your suggestion of HSA maxing is awesome and retiree medical is a must. If you combine those with the DC increase I think you get pretty close to fixing retirement.
A 4 year MD88B should pull in about 230,000 a year assuming 1050 credit hours a year and PS. I suspect 1050 credit hours is below the system average. That puts the company contribution at 37,000 a year. A 8% 401K contribution would get you near the limit. |
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 2914564)
I think his point was that for the vast majority of pilots any increase in DC plan contributions is simply a pay raise. The MEC to their credit has looked outside the box trying to find solutions to that issue. Almost every option discussed was blasted by the pilots on this forum.
A 4 year MD88B should pull in about 230,000 a year assuming 1050 credit hours a year and PS. I suspect 1050 credit hours is below the system average. That puts the company contribution at 37,000 a year. A 8% 401K contribution would get you near the limit. Sorry but a 4th year 88B at 1050 hours is $174k before PS which maybe adds another $20k at most. I’m soon to be a 6th year 73NB and I’ve not topped $210k including PS in any year. That’s with 1038 hours in 2018. I’ve also never topped out the company contribution. I think maxing our the company contribution will benefit far more pilots than you realize. JMHO. GP |
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 2914564)
I think his point was that for the vast majority of pilots any increase in DC plan contributions is simply a pay raise. The MEC to their credit has looked outside the box trying to find solutions to that issue. Almost every option discussed was blasted by the pilots on this forum.
A 4 year MD88B should pull in about 230,000 a year assuming 1050 credit hours a year and PS. I suspect 1050 credit hours is below the system average. That puts the company contribution at 37,000 a year. A 8% 401K contribution would get you near the limit. I have not credited 1050 any year here. If you live in base and do some GS’s maybe that is normal. A straight pay raise is still good value. If you add the HSA max and the retiree medical and lower our medical insurance premiums I would call that a win on retirement. |
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 2914564)
I think his point was that for the vast majority of pilots any increase in DC plan contributions is simply a pay raise. The MEC to their credit has looked outside the box trying to find solutions to that issue. Almost every option discussed was blasted by the pilots on this forum.
A 4 year MD88B should pull in about 230,000 a year assuming 1050 credit hours a year and PS. I suspect 1050 credit hours is below the system average. That puts the company contribution at 37,000 a year. A 8% 401K contribution would get you near the limit. |
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 2914564)
A 4 year MD88B should pull in about 230,000 a year assuming 1050 credit hours a year and PS. I suspect 1050 credit hours is below the system average. That puts the company contribution at 37,000 a year. A 8% 401K contribution would get you near the limit.
|
Originally Posted by Gunfighter
(Post 2914551)
Sad, but there is a lot of truth in that statement.
They are laser focused on success. The old guard is just 11 or 12 whiners who are ****ed they got voted out. Go to an MEC meeting. Just great volunteers doing an outstanding job. No drama. |
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 2914564)
I think his point was that for the vast majority of pilots any increase in DC plan contributions is simply a pay raise. The MEC to their credit has looked outside the box trying to find solutions to that issue. Almost every option discussed was blasted by the pilots on this forum.
A 4 year MD88B should pull in about 230,000 a year assuming 1050 credit hours a year and PS. I suspect 1050 credit hours is below the system average. That puts the company contribution at 37,000 a year. A 8% 401K contribution would get you near the limit. |
Originally Posted by Kjazz130
(Post 2914583)
Just like starting an IRA for your children at birth.
|
Originally Posted by Kjazz130
(Post 2914583)
Your right, for the majority of pilots it would be a straight pay raise and I get that. But, you can’t argue the value of maxing out in the early years. Just like starting an IRA for your children at birth.
I have not credited 1050 any year here. If you live in base and do some GS’s maybe that is normal. A straight pay raise is still good value. If you add the HSA max and the retiree medical and lower our medical insurance premiums I would call that a win on retirement. Even if it is a straight pay raise, I would still prefer that to any of the alternate vehicles that ALPA has proposed. Personally after maxing the 401k my next goal is saving for college. And even if I didn’t have kids I would much rather take the “pay raise” and invest it elsewhere to stay away from the MBCBP. |
Originally Posted by Der Meister
(Post 2914607)
Your math of 230k a year is a wee bit off... 1050x158=166,000 That's only a shortfall of 64,000. In order to get that 64k, profit sharing would have to be a 38% and that hasn't even remotely happened once.
So, the math isn’t totally terrible, but it doesn’t add up to maxing out 401K purely on DC. My limited discussion with the NYC leadership indicated that ALPA has an ask and a target for a larger DC contribution number so that a bigger portion of the pilot group hits max 401K without any out of pocket. I won’t quote the number, both for sake of not getting it wrong and because it isn’t a done deal by any measure. No out of pocket for a bigger chunk of the pilot group is an admirable goal. The corollary goal was an additional tax advantaged retirement vehicle (in your name) for those that exceed the max 401K via company contributions. I think both goals were reasonable and reasonably attractive. Time will tell if one or both come to fruition. I agree with Scoop that I would like to see a balanced approach to negotiating with the company, and that when an agreement becomes available, that the pilot group will be able to weigh it, voice their opinions, and the collective wisdom of those that have an open mind will probably carry the day. |
Originally Posted by gzsg
(Post 2914620)
This doesn’t exist at all. Our DALPA leaders are very young and junior.
They are laser focused on success. The old guard is just 11 or 12 whiners who are ****ed they got voted out. Go to an MEC meeting. Just great volunteers doing an outstanding job. No drama. The statement wasn't about the specific members of DALPA, rather his original statement was about the militant factions that would rather see the other opposing side fail than succeed. Some are so hungry to be right, that they don't care about winning. |
Originally Posted by Cogf16
(Post 2914629)
Again, just spitballing here about retirement. How about we determine a monthly dollar value(like a DB) that each pilot should get at retirement. Say 4K a month in today's dollars. Dont touch the 401K or PBGC. The real work is doing this for the 64 yr old and the 27 yr old, and everybody inbetween. Me personally, I'm within 5 years of retirement so I would require a lot more now than the guy who has 30+ years left. Thoughts???
No. (appreciate your attempt to split the difference, however) I don't much care what's in the next contract, but I'll vote "No" on any contract that stipulates retirement money that isn't directly and immediately put under my name, and my personal control. |
401k contributions, bit of an uneven measurement. We talking company funding the whole thing, or maxed out because I max out my portion? I’ve been able to make my max contribution ever year, but I have a military pension coming in too. 35yo married pilot with 4 kids coming from regionals....very likely can’t. But they also have a decade longer to save at Delta pay rates than I did. But I have tricare and don’t have to pay medical. I’m a commuter and want 30 hr layos so I can stack trips and minimize number of times I have to commute each month...
No real point other than when it comes time to vote, each pilots decision is very much a product of their own unique set of circumstances. |
Originally Posted by Kjazz130
(Post 2914583)
Just like starting an IRA for your children at birth.
Originally Posted by Gunfighter
(Post 2914636)
Have you found a way around the earned income requirement? Asking for future grandchildren.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
Originally Posted by GucciBoy
(Post 2914669)
If he’s found it, I’d love to hear it. I don’t think he has, though.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
Originally Posted by Gunfighter
(Post 2914636)
Have you found a way around the earned income requirement? Asking for future grandchildren.
|
Originally Posted by Gunfighter
(Post 2914636)
Have you found a way around the earned income requirement? Asking for future grandchildren.
|
Originally Posted by bugman61
(Post 2914638)
Even if it is a straight pay raise, I would still prefer that to any of the alternate vehicles that ALPA has proposed. Personally after maxing the 401k my next goal is saving for college. And even if I didn’t have kids I would much rather take the “pay raise” and invest it elsewhere to stay away from the MBCBP.
|
Originally Posted by Kjazz130
(Post 2914712)
I may be mistaken but I believe you can contribute $500 to a minors IRA with no earned income. If I am wrong please let me know.
|
Originally Posted by Cogf16
(Post 2914629)
Again, just spitballing here about retirement. How about we determine a monthly dollar value(like a DB) that each pilot should get at retirement. Say 4K a month in today's dollars. Dont touch the 401K or PBGC. The real work is doing this for the 64 yr old and the 27 yr old, and everybody inbetween. Me personally, I'm within 5 years of retirement so I would require a lot more now than the guy who has 30+ years left. Thoughts???
|
Originally Posted by Kjazz130
(Post 2914583)
Just like starting an IRA for your children at birth.
Originally Posted by ERflyer
(Post 2914704)
Make them an employee of your company performing age appropriate tasks for $6,000 a year.
Hit me up with that list of age-appropriate tasks for an infant.
Originally Posted by Fredturbo
(Post 2914706)
My 3 have been mowing the neighborhood yards since they were 2.
All well and good until you get audited and the agent is recently divorced and trying to kick a 2-pack-a-day habit and decides that 2-year-olds can’t mow lawns, even if the mower is self-propelled. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
Originally Posted by LandGreen2
(Post 2913835)
Just curious here... Since there is a wide range of great ideas on APC covering the bottom, mid and upper end of the seniority list:
What would be your ideas that help solve the retirement program here at Delta that works best for the entire demographic? Discuss! |
Originally Posted by GucciBoy
(Post 2914738)
Hit me up with that list of age-appropriate tasks for an infant.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
Originally Posted by GucciBoy
(Post 2914738)
Hit me up with that list of age-appropriate tasks for an infant.
|
Originally Posted by crewdawg
(Post 2914756)
Models for pictures relating to your side business. We all know every good airline pilot has some kind of side hustle. :D
Pics on ads. YouTube videos. A 6-year-old South Korean YouTuber just bought an $8M property. Coughing up $6,000 is nothing. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:27 PM. |
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands