|
Originally Posted by SharpestTool
(Post 1899730)
For the swing voters that want a couple percent more, say 3%, here is a back of the envelope calculation for an average 88 Capt flying 85 hours. For those who can't vote yes for anything rational, disregard.
To get the same deal at the amenable date, you now need $8445 additional dollars above and beyond the TA in order to break even. Pay rates would have to be .9% higher to recoup lost TVM. So lets say a swing voter wants 3% more in compounded rate. You need to add .9%. Lets round up to 4%. Not too bad. Lets go amendable date plus 6 months: You would need to recoup the $23,460 left on the table of original deal. This means an additional 2.6% must be added to your goal of TA plus 3% for a total of 5.6%. Starting to get ugly. TA is a 21.5% compounded raise, and now you need 5.6% more for your goal. 1 year past the amendable date you have to capture an additional $38,760 to break even. That amounts to 4.4%. Add in your goal of TA +3 and you need to see 7.4% more above and beyond the 21.5% of original TA. I'll stop there because it gets silly beyond 18 months, just ask SWAPA. They have lost a gargantuan amount of money over 3 years. The precedents that this TA being voted up would set would harm the industry forever. We're way beyond trying to maximize short-term earnings over 18 months. |
Originally Posted by Professor
(Post 1899837)
Ed. So do you want an explanation or are you happy with half info?
|
Originally Posted by Commando
(Post 1899810)
Not True if you get Full Retro.
Which anyone with a Brain will get once pass the Amendable Date. |
Originally Posted by Sounds
(Post 1899721)
Curious, was there ever a case (in any airline), where the second offer was more lucrative than the first?
|
Originally Posted by TED74
(Post 1899844)
You're about to see one.
|
Originally Posted by EdGrimley
(Post 1899848)
You seem to have missed my point. If we want half info then we will stick with you and your FPL sales team. Even the must forgive and forget ALPA guys within our airline (ie Denny C) know this is a turd. To paraphrase, there is simply too much take. Delta has filled their cart and left the pilots cart abysmally empty. No amount of sales jujitsu will change that.
That's fine. I'm sorry you have that opinion. But considering I was in the briefings today for 9+ hours; and I had questions about what I saw...I'm guessing someone else who hasn't made up their mind (like you) might want to know something about things like the EASK shift and OE's. I'm not going to sell anyone anything in the next few weeks. No amount of propaganda from you, drank or anyone else is going to change the type of info I give out. Some people like being informed and not indoctrinated. Goes for both sides. |
Originally Posted by LeineLodge
(Post 1899840)
Ferd,
I'll give you all of that. I shared your underwhelming sentiment when the details first started leaking out. I still have some large concerns...most notably: - 23G5; I want more clarification on this. From my perspective this is the biggest negative of the entire deal. I DO NOT like that trips are being pulled during the PBS run. - Sick; I want more clarification on the form 8500 issue. Other than that I don't really GAS because I don't call in sick unless I'm sick. If they want me to verify every once in awhile, so be it. The upside of an LTD bank for some of my unused time is offsets that to an extent for me. - JV compliance; I want more clarification on the difference between EASK's and BH's. My general feeling when they were talking about it at the meeting today in detail was "that's not so bad", but I want to be able to explain it to a kindergartner before I'm totally comfy with it. Those are the biggies for me. TLV to 81 comes with RCC language in our favor or it snaps back to 80. There are several other items that I want to explore in further detail, but after watching the whole show today it is not the horrific deal that some are painting on here. It still remains to be seen if the MEC will even send it out. More details are forthcoming, and once I saw the rationale behind the decisions I have to say I could argue it either way. Tomorrow should be interesting. I'm not sure they will even get to a vote by the end of the day, given the pace today, but I'd rather the reps take their time and get it right. I've said on here numerous times, I'm no fan of profit sharing. However, we have it, it works and needs to be left alone at this point. If, and that's a big if, you're going to play around with it, it needs to be done outside of Section 6 for transparency. The raise should be a raise. Speaking of the raise, the late year numbers are just disappointing to say the least. Good to see you on here too:cool: Ferd |
Originally Posted by SharpestTool
(Post 1899849)
Showing the depth of your knowledge here. 100% retro... BWaahhaaahhaaahhaa!!!
14 years, two upgrades, same pay rate. That's a real DALPA Victory there... Oh, and with over 28% inflation over those 14 years, I'm actually making about what I made as a 757 F/O in 1989. At least I don't have a retirement plan any more. My, aren't we proud. |
Originally Posted by SharpestTool
(Post 1899849)
Showing the depth of your knowledge here. 100% retro... BWaahhaaahhaaahhaa!!!
|
Originally Posted by Doug Masters
(Post 1899859)
I have to believe you're trolling to get us riled up. You can't possibly believe all of what you write. Either that or you've given up. You're "roll over and die" attitude just sucks. Grow some stones man.
hint: he's not a pilot, don't get worked up |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:43 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands