Just out of curiosity, did you find a single person doing Union work proposing to give some up in C2012? Maybe they were and it was my fault for not paying attention.

This time I'm paying attention and asking the question as the info wasn't put out for discussion the last time prior to the TA. You could say I lost some faith in the transparency.

Who and why?

A fixed portion of the profit sharing was traded for a 2% raise. That portion was worth somewhere between 0 and 1.9% depending on profit. It could never be more. The 2% is worth about 2.1% now and will continue to compound in the future.

Sailing

I hope you are correct and we don't touch profit sharing.

What will be fun is if we get a TA with reduced profit sharing, will be reading your whiney and pathetic rationalization and waterboy sales job for a yes vote. How giving up "at-risk" pay is a victory!

I get that, but this was undersold with the 4833 discussion and from what I know, no one realized that touching PS was on the table until it suddenly showed up to essentially pay for a portion of the raise.

If I'm not mistaken we get approx. 1/3 of the PS. Does this mean this reduction paid for roughly 6% of the raise as the company was able to reduce PS to other employee groups?

Been trying to make this point for a while. We put our blind trust in the contract survey and then are dismissed from providing any input to our reps until we have the official "TA" language in place. My issue with this, as a member, is that how am I supposed to be giving feedback to my elected LEC representatives if all I have to formulate my concerns is based on hearsay, rumor, and conjecture?

CDO's come to mind? Agreed 100%!

I guess the two guys I flew with encountered the same mysterious shadow agents.

Split Duty Periods is another example. I asked one of my reps what was being negotiated regarding the FAR 117. I was told he couldn't discuss the details with me due to non-disclosure agreements (or the like) other than to say it was a packaged list of 3 items the union was asking for. Then WHAM -- here you go, SPSs: enjoy that! What? Where did that come from? Why can't you tell me about this stuff so we can discuss it rather than just drop it on us out of no where????

From the sound of it the only thing that is at risk about the PS is our union trading it away.

All these posts and not one person can provide a single name of a union official who wants to give away profit sharing. Calling it at risk compensation does not mean you want to give it away. That is a standard term for any type of conditional pay.