Originally Posted by forgot to bid (Post 1907404)

Why would the company want to monetize PS if it was a gain for us? Or maybe it is a gain, it's just a small gain and deep concessions in Section 1, 14 and 23 to get the TA.

Originally Posted by Professor (Post 1907222)

There is no third party. That is a bad rumor. The communication will be between DHS and the pilot QHP. There is a change afoot to swap who handles long term disability. That is a third party.

Originally Posted by marton404 (Post 1907409)

On the profit sharing front, when the six billion is spent on stock buy backs, won't that stock then be available as options or outright grants to members of management? Perhaps not all, but could Mr. Anderson and company possibley have their own profit sharing plan coming up after the quarterly results are announced?

Originally Posted by Professor (Post 1907383)

Well. I do not.

And that was the specific accusation.

And I'm not going to tolerate it.

How is it that Carl risks no credibility with baseless accusations? And when proven wrong after a bizarre checking of the wrong people's schedules call all of the P2P teams liars.

I want him to be held accountable. But maybe that's too much?

Originally Posted by jobagodonuts (Post 1907411)

Professor, I'll ask again because I still haven't received an answer. Is any part of sick leave administration going to be handled by Sedgwick, or another third party, and if so, what?



I'm asking for a couple of reasons. First, this has been claimed by some on this and other forums. Secondly, another poster claimed Dr. Faulkner has refused to perform this expanded role in his DHS capacity. Lastly, the "Health Services Department" as it currently exists can't possibly be currently staffed to handle this larger role.



I believe, but may be wrong, that the Delta Employee Service Center is actually a third party and not Delta employees. In fact, when I log on the Delta ESS page on DeltaNet it says Xerox Business Services at the bottom of the web page.



I can envision the "Health Services Department" being presented similarly as a "Delta" department, but actually run by a third party such as Sedgwick. All this is conjecture on my part and I'm looking for clarification. I don't know squat about Sedgwick but what I'm reading here and elsewhere is not very comforting.

Originally Posted by scambo1 (Post 1907413)

How is it that the MEC chairman willingly risks all his credibility with baseless promotion?



Just thought I'd toss that out there...



I want him held accountable too.



By the way Prof, I apologized to you earlier. You have a tough job. No, you actually have an impossible job.

Originally Posted by forgot to bid (Post 1907404)

The new Table Talk on Pay is out. Something interesting:



IMHO:

• "Reflective of the changes in the size and profitability of the company over the past few years," means we are making a lot more money.
• "one of the goals of Delta management was to modify the profit sharing program." Because they were paying us a fortune.
• "To reach this TA," meaning to get a TA with the company the NC had to...
• "the MEC agreed to modifications in the formula of profit sharing calculations that converted these modifications to hourly pay." monetize or no deal.

Now over the last few months we were being led to believe DALPA wanted to do that to give us more "guaranteed pay" vs "at-risk pay". But here, it's the company made us, the NC, do it.

Why would the company want to monetize PS if it was a gain for us?

Or maybe it is a gain, it's just a small gain and deep concessions in Section 1, 14 and 23 to get the TA. Then again everyone said pay was not negotiated until the very end, so did we make concessions throughout the PWA only to come up with 8633 and reduced PS at the end?

Is this how bargaining credits work? You throw 6,000 FOs under the bus, demand money in return and they then say nope that only affects 180 so here's 8033?