Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
01-28-2015, 07:03 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 11,990
This web board needs a series of LIKE buttons, including:
01-28-2015, 07:32 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2009
Position: right for a long, long time
Posts: 2,642
Originally Posted by Purple Drank
Well, Shiznit, since you are generally in lockstep with the unelected MEC administrators, I'm sure you'll understand why some of us might be skeptical as you attempt to spin a solution to the company's problems as a "win" for the line pilot.
Next thing you know, the company will be able to cover its bases with the other employee groups--and even get some mileage with the FA union vote!-- by telling them it was ALPA's idea to lower our profit sharing!
ALPA's unelected bureaucrats are fantastic at solving the company's problems. Wish they were equally concerned about the folks paying dues.
Next thing you know, the company will be able to cover its bases with the other employee groups--and even get some mileage with the FA union vote!-- by telling them it was ALPA's idea to lower our profit sharing!
ALPA's unelected bureaucrats are fantastic at solving the company's problems. Wish they were equally concerned about the folks paying dues.
The TRUTH About Black Helicopters!
01-28-2015, 07:52 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,108
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
This web board needs a series of LIKE buttons, including:
Help me out here. In both the DPA and ALPA contract surveys over 90% of the Delta pilots want to keep or increase our profit sharing.
Why are reps in the crew room initiating conversation about reducing it?
To me it looks like they are going to disregard us and do another end around.
Am I wrong??
Jerry
01-28-2015, 08:31 AM
Straight QOL, homie
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: Record-Shattering Profit Facilitator
Posts: 4,202
Originally Posted by shiznit
Just for you:
Last edited by Purple Drank; 01-28-2015 at 08:54 AM.
01-28-2015, 08:53 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,275
Originally Posted by Herkflyr
If we leave PS untouched and ultimately get a Section 6 contract agreed to and ratified, why would the members even think about discussing PS after the process? Unless I am missing something I don't get it. What's the point of negotiating a contract at all if you then say "okay, now let's really start talking about PS, or whatever"?
2006-Profit sharing sucks, we will never see a dime. Stupid ALPA for wasting negotiating capital on it!
2012-OMG, ALPA gave up 1.9% in profit sharing for a 2% raise! Stupid ALPA
2018-OMG I have taken a huge paycut because profit sharing is paying nothing. How could ALPA have been so stupid not to convert it into additional raises when they had the chance!
01-28-2015, 08:54 AM
Super Moderator
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: DAL 330
Posts: 6,870
Profit Sharing
It seems like there are a lot of "profit sharing prophets" 
posting on this thread and for the most part it is good. Forewarned is forearmed.
One thing I keep hearing is that the Wall Street types are having heartburn ( more than usual) over the profit sharing amount.
Has anyone actually seen an article that mentions this - I have not.
Now don't get me wrong, I'm sure they hate us getting PS in the amounts that we are currently and forecasted to receive, but so what. I'm sure they are not thrilled about Pilots pulling in $300k per year either but it's happening.
The PS payout is a percentage (10/15) and other than the one bump does not change. So the masters of the universe are OK with these percentages at a 3 B profit but are dismayed that our profit (and corresponding stock price) is going up like Al Gore's infamous "hockey stick" chart?
Too much money in PS seems like a very good problem to have. If anyone has actually seen an article on this subject can you please post the link.
Finally, remember Ghostbusters, Crossing the streams (PS and section 6) would be a bad thing. How bad? Biblically bad, cats and dogs living together type of stuff.
Scoop
posting on this thread and for the most part it is good. Forewarned is forearmed.One thing I keep hearing is that the Wall Street types are having heartburn ( more than usual) over the profit sharing amount.
Has anyone actually seen an article that mentions this - I have not.
Now don't get me wrong, I'm sure they hate us getting PS in the amounts that we are currently and forecasted to receive, but so what. I'm sure they are not thrilled about Pilots pulling in $300k per year either but it's happening.
The PS payout is a percentage (10/15) and other than the one bump does not change. So the masters of the universe are OK with these percentages at a 3 B profit but are dismayed that our profit (and corresponding stock price) is going up like Al Gore's infamous "hockey stick" chart?
Too much money in PS seems like a very good problem to have. If anyone has actually seen an article on this subject can you please post the link.
Finally, remember Ghostbusters, Crossing the streams (PS and section 6) would be a bad thing. How bad? Biblically bad, cats and dogs living together type of stuff.
Scoop
01-28-2015, 09:17 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: Captain
Posts: 822
Originally Posted by gzsg
Buck
Help me out here. In both the DPA and ALPA contract surveys over 90% of the Delta pilots want to keep or increase our profit sharing.
Why are reps in the crew room initiating conversation about reducing it?
To me it looks like they are going to disregard us and do another end around.
Am I wrong??
Jerry
Help me out here. In both the DPA and ALPA contract surveys over 90% of the Delta pilots want to keep or increase our profit sharing.
Why are reps in the crew room initiating conversation about reducing it?
To me it looks like they are going to disregard us and do another end around.
Am I wrong??
Jerry
That being said, I am always open to creative ways to increase my compensation... I am just not sure there is going to be a good way to convince 50 percent of the pilots that reducing PS is a good idea (with the current outlook), unless of course the sum is greater than next years projected PS and pay.
Me thinks this is going to be a very "awkward" negotiation. If it is true that the goal of the company is to reduce PS, we may not be the ones in a hurry this time..
01-28-2015, 09:46 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,275
I suspect the companies desires on profit sharing are not yet even formulated. That process will start on Monday after the American pilot ratification results are posted.
01-28-2015, 09:48 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,522
The whole fake philosophy trick of "everything is for sale now let's just talk pricing" is something we need to get past.
Would you give up hotels on the overnights? No? Not even for ONE MILLION DOLLARS PER YEAR?!?!?!?!
There is no way the company is going to try and roll back or eliminate profit sharing just so they can give us the same or more. If they move to do this (and it seems highly likely they will try) they will be attempting to save money, one way or the other. Why else would they want to do it?
Does anyone really think we're going to get full value immortal "locked in" raises, in addition to whatever other raises we were going to get, and they will survive a 6-10B per year swing that wipes out all profits and even puts us into the red? Why would the company want that over the current system?
If we touch PS it needs to be a separate issue so we can see what we're truly going to get for it. Yet I bet they won't be interested in that in the first place. The real value in trading away PS is in moving so many things around that our "big raise" helps pay for itself.
Would you give up hotels on the overnights? No? Not even for ONE MILLION DOLLARS PER YEAR?!?!?!?!
There is no way the company is going to try and roll back or eliminate profit sharing just so they can give us the same or more. If they move to do this (and it seems highly likely they will try) they will be attempting to save money, one way or the other. Why else would they want to do it?
Does anyone really think we're going to get full value immortal "locked in" raises, in addition to whatever other raises we were going to get, and they will survive a 6-10B per year swing that wipes out all profits and even puts us into the red? Why would the company want that over the current system?
If we touch PS it needs to be a separate issue so we can see what we're truly going to get for it. Yet I bet they won't be interested in that in the first place. The real value in trading away PS is in moving so many things around that our "big raise" helps pay for itself.
01-28-2015, 10:07 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,275
Originally Posted by gloopy
The whole fake philosophy trick of "everything is for sale now let's just talk pricing" is something we need to get past.
Would you give up hotels on the overnights? No? Not even for ONE MILLION DOLLARS PER YEAR?!?!?!?!
There is no way the company is going to try and roll back or eliminate profit sharing just so they can give us the same or more. If they move to do this (and it seems highly likely they will try) they will be attempting to save money, one way or the other. Why else would they want to do it?
Does anyone really think we're going to get full value immortal "locked in" raises, in addition to whatever other raises we were going to get, and they will survive a 6-10B per year swing that wipes out all profits and even puts us into the red? Why would the company want that over the current system?
If we touch PS it needs to be a separate issue so we can see what we're truly going to get for it. Yet I bet they won't be interested in that in the first place. The real value in trading away PS is in moving so many things around that our "big raise" helps pay for itself.
Would you give up hotels on the overnights? No? Not even for ONE MILLION DOLLARS PER YEAR?!?!?!?!
There is no way the company is going to try and roll back or eliminate profit sharing just so they can give us the same or more. If they move to do this (and it seems highly likely they will try) they will be attempting to save money, one way or the other. Why else would they want to do it?
Does anyone really think we're going to get full value immortal "locked in" raises, in addition to whatever other raises we were going to get, and they will survive a 6-10B per year swing that wipes out all profits and even puts us into the red? Why would the company want that over the current system?
If we touch PS it needs to be a separate issue so we can see what we're truly going to get for it. Yet I bet they won't be interested in that in the first place. The real value in trading away PS is in moving so many things around that our "big raise" helps pay for itself.
They will certainly want and attempt to do it if American remains under the MOU contract. Americans raise next year will be based on our published hourly rates.
If the American contract ratifies then I dont see the company having a big interest in getting rid of it. When times get tough again and they will at some point it's a built in pay cut they don't have to negotiate.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
