Details on Delta TA
04-29-2015 | 12:14 PM
#3751
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,642
Likes: 0
From: right for a long, long time
Oberon makes a good point about the increases in headcount. I don't have a measure for that when you look systemwide for all employee groups.
It's still all just napkin math. I trust my MEC to do the numbers, they've been providing accurate costing to check the Company's math for the last 7 years.
04-29-2015 | 12:31 PM
#3752
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,108
Likes: 0
No. I said a 10B PTIX would result in a roughly 25% PS payout.
Oberon makes a good point about the increases in headcount. I don't have a measure for that when you look systemwide for all employee groups.
It's still all just napkin math. I trust my MEC to do the numbers, they've been providing accurate costing to check the Company's math for the last 7 years.
Oberon makes a good point about the increases in headcount. I don't have a measure for that when you look systemwide for all employee groups.
It's still all just napkin math. I trust my MEC to do the numbers, they've been providing accurate costing to check the Company's math for the last 7 years.
04-29-2015 | 01:55 PM
#3753
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,877
Likes: 194
There is a lot of harm to us if we leave it untouched and profits go back to the norm. Only if they stay high would there be no harm. Given the limited number of years I plan to work probably best for me to leave it the same however.
04-29-2015 | 03:30 PM
#3754
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,039
Likes: 0
From: 7ERB
TEN
04-29-2015 | 05:50 PM
#3755
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 852
Likes: 0
I'm not that pessimistic. I like the idea of all of the "active" elements being settled and submitted to the pilot group for ratification. I don't see as much discussion and engagement by the rank-and-file if the 3 items you mentioned are separated and handled individually.
I get that you don't trust ALPA. That's your burden.
I can only speak for me. I think it's important, and would vote NO if it were eliminated. I also think it is vulnerable. I think the industry is cyclical and vulnerable. I don't think pay rates are as vulnerable. If you do, then we're going to have to disagree on that.
04-29-2015 | 05:59 PM
#3756
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 852
Likes: 0
I think we WILL have both!
I would like to convert some of the profit sharing "liability" (using Wall Street's vernacular) into something that is less vulnerable while it is a big liability in front of the company.
Do you think Profit Sharing conversion would be possible if/when Delta has an unprofitable year?
I want to grab more, less vulnerable $$, while it's an active issue. I don't want to eliminate it! I want higher-than-expected pay rates as a result of converting SOME of it.
I would like to convert some of the profit sharing "liability" (using Wall Street's vernacular) into something that is less vulnerable while it is a big liability in front of the company.
Do you think Profit Sharing conversion would be possible if/when Delta has an unprofitable year?
I want to grab more, less vulnerable $$, while it's an active issue. I don't want to eliminate it! I want higher-than-expected pay rates as a result of converting SOME of it.
04-29-2015 | 06:20 PM
#3757
Back on TDY
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,487
Likes: 0
From: 747-400 Captain
04-29-2015 | 06:27 PM
#3758
Back on TDY
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,487
Likes: 0
From: 747-400 Captain
I'm not that pessimistic. I like the idea of all of the "active" elements being settled and submitted to the pilot group for ratification. I don't see as much discussion and engagement by the rank-and-file if the 3 items you mentioned are separated and handled individually.
What's the reality? By lumping all 3 items in to Section 6, nobody will ever be able to prove how much we, yet again, self-funded our pay rate gains.
Carl
04-29-2015 | 06:29 PM
#3759
The Brown Dot +1
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,775
Likes: 0
From: 777B
This is EXACTLY the excuse strategy being studied by the MEC administration. "The reason we had to lump profit sharing and the Atlantic JV grievance all into this Section 6 negotiations is so the pilot group could discuss and vote on all 3 issues."
What's the reality? By lumping all 3 items in to Section 6, nobody will ever be able to prove how much we, yet again, self-funded our pay rate gains.
Carl
What's the reality? By lumping all 3 items in to Section 6, nobody will ever be able to prove how much we, yet again, self-funded our pay rate gains.
Carl
04-29-2015 | 06:38 PM
#3760
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 852
Likes: 0
I suppose there could be black helicopters tracking you right now, but I'm not in any of them.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
