![]() |
|
Originally Posted by orvil
(Post 1679590)
I am not management. I am not a stockholder. I am an hourly wage worker. I do not change how I conduct my little operation based on corporate profitability.
Originally Posted by orvil
(Post 1679590)
I want this compensation in my pay rates and work rules. Both for the good years and bad years.
|
Originally Posted by gzsg
(Post 1679576)
Good Point. But all the earlies are not necessarily 64.
|
Originally Posted by orvil
(Post 1679590)
Sorry to burst your bubble. You are a not alone. I share your view about profit sharing.
I am not management. I am not a stockholder. I am an hourly wage worker. I do not change how I conduct my little operation based on corporate profitability. I want this compensation in my pay rates and work rules. Both for the good years and bad years. We need to.keep.what we have and make.historic gains. This is not a concessionary contract. |
Originally Posted by Pineapple Guy
(Post 1679586)
I agree we've had 111 thus far. 56 of those were age 65 mandatory. We'll have another 62 mandatory and probably 60 other, for a total of approximately 230 this year, and while that happens to be 2x the mandatory as you mention, it also happens to be mandatory plus 1% of the list.
In the coming years, with the bulge of pilots over age 60, I suspect the 1% non-mandatory group will be slightly larger, but it won't be 2x the actual, so if you're looking for predictions: 2015: 300 (170 age 65 plus 130 more) 2016: 370 (230 age 65 plus 140 more) Thanks for the post. |
Why are the pilots who still have the full defined benefit plan staying beyond age 60?
Is it a medical coverage problem? Their pay rates as a senior captain might be pretty good but by giving up the retirement benefits they could be receiving, they are essentially working for a fraction of that pay rate. Is it really worth the few dollars a month extra to work full time? Help me understand the reasoning. I think if it were me, I'd be out fishing instead of working. |
Originally Posted by Check Essential
(Post 1679628)
Why are the pilots who still have the full defined benefit plan staying beyond age 60?
Is it a medical coverage problem? Their pay rates as a senior captain might be pretty good but by giving up the retirement benefits they could be receiving, they are essentially working for a fraction of that pay rate. Is it really worth the few dollars a month extra to work full time? Help me understand the reasoning. I think if it were me, I'd be out fishing instead of working. |
Originally Posted by Check Essential
(Post 1679628)
Why are the pilots who still have the full defined benefit plan staying beyond age 60?
Is it a medical coverage problem? Their pay rates as a senior captain might be pretty good but by giving up the retirement benefits they could be receiving, they are essentially working for a fraction of that pay rate. Is it really worth the few dollars a month extra to work full time? Help me understand the reasoning. I think if it were me, I'd be out fishing instead of working. |
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 1679663)
I have a friend who is a 85 hire at NW. His retirement package is about 80,000 a year from the DB plan. His currently averages 270 k a year plus the DC plan. Total over 300k. He would be very surprised to find out he is working for a fraction of his pay.
|
Originally Posted by Ferd149
(Post 1679312)
I will say this about profit sharing. I'm the only guy on here who thinks it's a bad thing..............so what does that tell ya:D
...It's just a lack of long-term memory amongst the pack. Prior to C2012, we only had one year where profit sharing had put anything meaningful in our wallets. I think that there is more than one way to make our next contract just as valuable to pilots while removing the variables associated with profit sharing. Does anyone honestly believe that this period of economic expansion will continue unabated? Does anyone really want their pay tied to managerial performance? I would rather eliminate uncertainty during the next downturn, and beef up our work rules, which are notoriously hard to change in negotiations. I think this will be a tough sell to the membership. Probably an impossible sell if the projection for next year's profit sharing is correct. I'm just one pilot, anyway, I'm sure there are about twelve thousand other guys with better ideas... |
Originally Posted by gzsg
(Post 1679625)
Your numbers sounds very reasonable and you are probably right. I think they will be higher.
Thanks for the post. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:04 AM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands