Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
01-28-2015 | 03:28 AM
Looking for a laugh
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,099
Likes: 0
01-28-2015 | 03:37 AM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
What I want to know is whether transferring from variable to less variable, will the end result be a W2 increase or would a higher pay rate be considered such a win that a W2 decrease is found acceptable?
Last edited by forgot to bid; 01-28-2015 at 03:52 AM.
01-28-2015 | 03:53 AM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,775
Likes: 0
From: 777B
Timbo, thanks... Wouldn't have seen Carl's comment otherwise; he's correct on one point, right now no one has a choice (nobody at DAL is negotiating anything related to Section 6 right now). It may never happen, but it's worth considering from a purely mathematical standpoint.
I DO NOT agree with changing PS into payrates and calling it a raise. Would we like C2015 raises, THEN a PS change that goes on top of that? Maybe, gotta see the math on what we get for it...
Do I like having as much of my income at risk, and DELAYED by more than a YEAR to be paid....No, I do not like that.
The Company can "share" a bigger chunk of those "profits" with me in my bi-monthly paychecks. I'd rather get paid NOW, get the extra 15% in my 401k NOW; use that money to make more money NOW. I'd rather not let the Company sit on our money for a year to earn the interest we could have made.
We get it.. Carl is bad at finance (thank God he still has his 747 Captain pension). He thinks it's a good idea to let someone else keep part of our paychecks every month, and delay more of our money going in our 401k plans sooner.
Timbo, why you think he should "preach it" is lost on me...
I DO NOT agree with changing PS into payrates and calling it a raise. Would we like C2015 raises, THEN a PS change that goes on top of that? Maybe, gotta see the math on what we get for it...
Do I like having as much of my income at risk, and DELAYED by more than a YEAR to be paid....No, I do not like that.
The Company can "share" a bigger chunk of those "profits" with me in my bi-monthly paychecks. I'd rather get paid NOW, get the extra 15% in my 401k NOW; use that money to make more money NOW. I'd rather not let the Company sit on our money for a year to earn the interest we could have made.
We get it.. Carl is bad at finance (thank God he still has his 747 Captain pension). He thinks it's a good idea to let someone else keep part of our paychecks every month, and delay more of our money going in our 401k plans sooner.
Timbo, why you think he should "preach it" is lost on me...
Your point is well taken, and most economists would agree, that letting someone hold on to your money instead of you is ill-advised. With that said, in the case of profit sharing, I'm okay with that. It's an accrual system and maxes out most 401k's in one fell swoop. The only thing I'd consider swapping SOME profit sharing for is if the company maxes out my 401k to the 415c limit - without my involvement.
I'm not Timbo. He's a tool.
01-28-2015 | 03:55 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,642
Likes: 0
From: right for a long, long time
It's additional input, maybe one or more of those the pilots said they didn't do the survey, so when PS topic was brought up the rep asked him directly! ..but it is possible that it was a trial balloon when you heard it in passing.
Can't know the real story unless you were there for the whole conversation or had your own conversation with said reps. Anecdotal bits don't cut it.
01-28-2015 | 03:59 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,642
Likes: 0
From: right for a long, long time
What he is preaching is pay rates and profit sharing are decoupled (separate line items) right now and I agree with that.
Your point is well taken, and most economists would agree, that letting someone hold on to your money instead of you is ill-advised. With that said, in the case of profit sharing, I'm okay with that. It's an accrual system and maxes out most 401k's in one fell swoop. The only thing I'd consider swapping SOME profit sharing for is if the company maxes out my 401k to the 415c limit - without my involvement.
I'm not Timbo. He's a tool.
Your point is well taken, and most economists would agree, that letting someone hold on to your money instead of you is ill-advised. With that said, in the case of profit sharing, I'm okay with that. It's an accrual system and maxes out most 401k's in one fell swoop. The only thing I'd consider swapping SOME profit sharing for is if the company maxes out my 401k to the 415c limit - without my involvement.
I'm not Timbo. He's a tool.
Timbo, scambo... Po-tay-to, po-tah-to!
01-28-2015 | 04:03 AM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,775
Likes: 0
From: 777B
I hope Leo stayed in his house in Nantucket this week.
01-28-2015 | 04:15 AM
Runs with scissors
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 7,847
Likes: 0
From: Going to hell in a bucket, but enjoying the ride .
01-28-2015 | 04:17 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,642
Likes: 0
From: right for a long, long time
01-28-2015 | 04:19 AM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,775
Likes: 0
From: 777B
I'd rather take my money now, I don't want to wait a year for it to get to me, that's lost income. To each his own if it ever were to be an option. I respect that and would be good with whatever the group wanted, it's about US, not about ME.
Timbo, scambo... Po-tay-to, po-tah-to!
Timbo, scambo... Po-tay-to, po-tah-to!
01-28-2015 | 04:49 AM
Line Holder
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 378
Likes: 5
I told him I do not want PS touched in section 6, if and its a big IF, they want to discuss reductions we do it after section 6 is completed and passed by the line pilots. Then and only then would I be willing to discuss it. I say this because it's the only way we can get the real numbers on what we trade PS for. I like PS the way it is and do not want to touch it but like everything in life there is a price I would trade some or all PS for.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
