Actually the contract surveys favoured increasing profit sharing in conjunction with 40% pay increase in date of signing.

Wow, it really is easy to just arbitrarily disperse facts from the contract survey.

Seriously though, please tell us all how you are privy to this information while it is kept from all of us.

i saw that video too and only heard retain profit sharing, never heard that it wasnt to be touched but maybe i heard wrong, you can retain it while making changes that benefit pilots but only as long as its separate from actual pay increases the we deserve, id rather see you go after the alpos for the dues waste, lack of fight on scope and working to fars, this ps stuff is a diversion from the real problems

You may well have found the out that Donatelli will use when our MEC agrees to reduced profit sharing. That's a parsing of words that I hadn't considered.

Agreed, but the only way for that to happen is to separate the entire issue of profit sharing from Section 6. Then, let's talk.

I can do both...I'm not tired.

I'll work on it...if you promise to work on sentence structure and capitalization.

Carl

Very good catch. Even if it's gutted, it's still technically "retained."

I'm with you, gloopy, jerry, and every one else who has called for at least three separate transactions regarding the issues before us:

1) negotiate and ratify C15 with zero concessions and meaningful gains

2) bring the AF/KLM grievance to it's conclusion. Nail the company's nuts to the wall for ignoring our deal. Thrash RA for his "rules of the road" moral hypocrisy.

3) consider selling profit sharing high. Otherwise keep in tact.

Good grief guys, why all this continual screeching about profit sharing? I haven't met anybody (myself included) that will vote for a TA that funds a payraise with PS. Nobody at dALPA is talking about it as much of a consideration (never say never, but) good grief aren't there more valid things to talk about? I think it's safe to say that nobody here will vote for a reduction in PS, so why continue to beat the deceased equine?

I know I am going to regret this, but exactly how do you figure there will be NO concessions? Answer this honestly if you can: Do you think management will sign off on anything that is completely one sided? How do you propose to accomplish this amazing feat of "negotiations"?

For that matter, how do we expect to make any meaningful gains by allowing "our"' "union" to represent us without clearly defining its negotiating goals?

This is a once in a lifetime negotiating environment. Why are you so anxious to lower our expectations? What is your agenda? Are you even a pilot?

As has been "figured out" I am management, an ALPA insider, not a pilot (certainly not one that works for DAL) and Tsquare.

I have no agenda. I just want to know if you really believe in your "logical" mind whether achieving a contract without any concession whatsoever is really achievable. Stop screeching about an agenda, lowering expectations and all that DPA talking point nonsense and talk to the issue. Tell me how to get a contract with a C2K+ inflation pay increase, trip touching vacations drop, a 7th week of vacation, increase in PS AND the 401k without any concession on our part whatsoever. Is it because we "deserve it" and that management will acknowledge that fact and just do it?

Give me fact and leave your continual vitriol on the keyboard for once.

Here's a fact: We're not going to attain anywhere near our maximum deal without strong, decisive leadership and a willingness to do whatever it takes to get it.

I have seen nothing from Donatelli to suggest he has the stones to lead us to the "best contract in the world" he blabbers about (but has not demonstrated the tools to achieve).

To answer your question: I'm not on board with any givebacks whatsoever. We gave far too much last time and in the 117 deal. Your posts reek of "cost neutrality' and "self-funded" cost reshuffling. I'll wait as long as possible (while making negotiations as messy and public as possible) if the company's not going to pony up.

Every one of your posts has been an attempt to lower our expectations and (arrogantly) talk down to those who are willing to wait for the right deal. Why is that?

If you take my posts as being arrogant or talking down to you, that's on you. I just want to know how you expect to achieve your goals.

So let's look at it this way. Let's say that you want C2K + inflation or no deal. At some point in time, we will probably achieve it but how long are you willing to wait for that? Remember that we get zero pay increases until we negotiate a contract. Zero. And every day that goes by, that requirement to get the inflation override increases. Also, every day that goes by means that you have lost money that you can be using to invest and money that you can use to buy that new car or buy your wife a new sewing machine (JOKE). So you are willing to wait as long as it takes, right? Now, not only have you lost the payrates necessary to achieve C2K + inflation,in the interim time your buying power has been eroded, and your retirement savings have flattened due to lack of increased contributions and the loss of the gains over the increase in those contributions you would have achieved. Your gains will have to increase at a faster rate in order to catch up. Think of it this way: I will take $100,000/year for 10 years over $1,000,000 10 years from now. Maybe you wouldn't because you think you will be able to demand $1,100,000 when the time comes. Even if that is true, I will still kick your ass at that point when we total up the coin purse. I have read enough of your posts on here to know that you aren't really interested in seeing the logic of the argument, and even if you were you wouldn't admit it, and really, that's OK.

All I ask is this: Do the math honestly. Keep the results to yourself if you wish and continue the chest pounding if that makes you feel better, but be true to yourself with the math.

Have a wonderful day.