Details on Delta TA
#3391
Indeed. Whether it's the old heads like Alfaromeo and Karnak, or their (wink wink) reincarnations like Bender and the Tool, the arrogance and narcissism always comes through. I guess that DALPA "special committee" has just got to stay busy somehow.
Carl
Carl
#3392
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 1,184
Likes: 0
#3393
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 1,184
Likes: 0
You're the king of narcissism. Are you posting here on your other company's time?
#3394
Banned
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Denny,
No it wasn't compensation for past sacrifices. It was the best we could do for future compensation based on a very weak hand we were dealt post-bankruptcy. We would've opted for fixed pay increases if we would have had the negotiating leverage.
I understand you value the insurance as a "bonus". Nothing wrong with that. What that insurance is worth is the question. The value changes with the business cycle. Are you willing to pay the premium when risk changes? That is the question.
Profit sharing is a tool in which its value changes in the business cycle. We should look to monetize when its value is high and likely to be lower in the future. We can initiate it when its value is low and likely to increase in the future. It isn't good or bad. I'm saying I think it is a good time to capture value and reduce risk.
No it wasn't compensation for past sacrifices. It was the best we could do for future compensation based on a very weak hand we were dealt post-bankruptcy. We would've opted for fixed pay increases if we would have had the negotiating leverage.
I understand you value the insurance as a "bonus". Nothing wrong with that. What that insurance is worth is the question. The value changes with the business cycle. Are you willing to pay the premium when risk changes? That is the question.
Profit sharing is a tool in which its value changes in the business cycle. We should look to monetize when its value is high and likely to be lower in the future. We can initiate it when its value is low and likely to increase in the future. It isn't good or bad. I'm saying I think it is a good time to capture value and reduce risk.
#3395
Banned
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Well now were cookin'. One of the original Poo Monkeys.
#3396
There are no "appearances" in pay rates. They are either higher, lower or equal.
Twice in the same paragraph, you tie pay rates to profit sharing. The members don't want that. What you wrote below doesn't wash with what you wrote above.
Contradicting yourself in the same post doesn't help.
Carl
Carl
#3397
Carl
#3398
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 1,184
Likes: 0
There are no "appearances" in pay rates. They are either higher, lower or equal.
Twice in the same paragraph, you tie pay rates to profit sharing. The members don't want that. What you wrote below doesn't wash with what you wrote above.
Contradicting yourself in the same post doesn't help.
Carl
Twice in the same paragraph, you tie pay rates to profit sharing. The members don't want that. What you wrote below doesn't wash with what you wrote above.
Contradicting yourself in the same post doesn't help.
Carl
#3400
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,108
Likes: 0
Denny,
No it wasn't compensation for past sacrifices. It was the best we could do for future compensation based on a very weak hand we were dealt post-bankruptcy. We would've opted for fixed pay increases if we would have had the negotiating leverage.
I understand you value the insurance as a "bonus". Nothing wrong with that. What that insurance is worth is the question. The value changes with the business cycle. Are you willing to pay the premium when risk changes? That is the question.
Profit sharing is a tool in which its value changes in the business cycle. We should look to monetize when its value is high and likely to be lower in the future. We can initiate it when its value is low and likely to increase in the future. It isn't good or bad. I'm saying I think it is a good time to capture value and reduce risk.
No it wasn't compensation for past sacrifices. It was the best we could do for future compensation based on a very weak hand we were dealt post-bankruptcy. We would've opted for fixed pay increases if we would have had the negotiating leverage.
I understand you value the insurance as a "bonus". Nothing wrong with that. What that insurance is worth is the question. The value changes with the business cycle. Are you willing to pay the premium when risk changes? That is the question.
Profit sharing is a tool in which its value changes in the business cycle. We should look to monetize when its value is high and likely to be lower in the future. We can initiate it when its value is low and likely to increase in the future. It isn't good or bad. I'm saying I think it is a good time to capture value and reduce risk.
The survey has spoken.
Maybe 2018.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post


they never get old.
