The Question of “Optional”
 

Ok, I posted this in another thread but feel like it needs its own thread for pilots to comment on:

The following is my opinion. From what information I can gather the "optional" choice is very complicated and there is a process that has to be adhered to. My understanding is Dalpa can say it will be optional because, at this point, it hasn't been determined yet that it can't be optional.

The first step is that something has to be negotiated with regards to the proposal. Lets just assume the proposal is negotiated as is. Once this is done then both Delta and Dalpa submit this Plan to the IRS and tell the IRS what they intend to do. It is then up to the IRS to approve or reject all or part of the Plan.
Since an MBCBP is legal in and of itself, the only thing that is possibly in question would be the "optional" nature of the the Plan.

The above brings me to a question. Why would the IRS not agree to the Plan being optional? If they don't and it applies to everyone then that will lead to more money that is tax deferred (not a good thing in the IRS's eyes) than if the Plan were optional where the IRS could collect more taxes now and on future investments of that money.

Standing by for incoming!!!https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/i...lies/smile.gif

Denny

What if they say it cannot be optional, then what happens?

It should be a question of if on average it will benefit the majority of the pilot group. If so it should be implemented.

If it’s not optional, I don’t want it. I don’t see how ALPA can sell it as optional now because it hasn’t been shown that it is possible to be optional. Why would the IRS object to the optional part? Because, as I understand it, it would take a tax law or at least rule change to make it so. This is our government we’re talking about and we all know nothing happens quickly with any .gov agency. I guess it’s a difference of perspective on those points.

Have you asked your negotiators what it means?

And how are you going to measure who benefits? Are you measuring percentages based on date of signing, 1 Jan 2020 or the final year of the contract? Demographics are changing rapidly.

A 20% pay raise would benefit me, but I wouldn't take that pay if it were a quid for caving on scope, training or work rules.

You oversimplify a decision point drastically with this post.

Define the parameters outside or after section 6, submit it to the IRS, and come back with approval (and restrictions) in hand. Until then, bogging down negotiations with so many unknowns seems asinine to me.

Serious question: For what reason do you believe the IRS makes any determination based on the revenue generated by such a decision? Is this codified into law? Are you counting on logic or fiscal responsibility to drive a gargantuan federal agency?

If approving an optional plan makes implementation of the whole thing more likely, the IRS actually reduces revenue over status quo.

Isn't that like saying he's guilty until it's proved that he's innocent?

Why was the VEBA not optional?

I'd ask the NC, "Have other companies petitioned the IRS and gotten their plan to be optional?"