tom14cat14

I have only seen a small mention of how much giving up Profit share could be could limit future income. There is a benefit for changing at risk income such as profit share and turn it into pay rates. However you have to look at what Delta has been doing with a lot of their money. They are spending a lot on buying shares of companies. This, if all goes as planned will be very profitable for Delta. If you look long term at this, Delta could decide that they make more money by just having shares of foreign airlines. They could decide to do cost cutting on the Delta name brand and increase profit margin by basically becoming more of a holding company.
Short term gaining pay rates vs profit share would be good. But if you look long term there is a chance you will want the profit share more than pay rates.

If this has already been discussed at great length I apologized.

scambo1

No, it's never been discussed before.

There is the potential in a couple years using DALPA numbers that profit sharing could be around 28%...using the current formula.

With training difficulties and manning shortfalls potentially increasing GS opportunities, you can be talking about real money (like a days pay for RA).

badflaps

In the end I think DAL would love to be a world wide ticket broker. With a little dab of DC-9 flying...

Ferd149

You could call it Sky Team Air Lines (or Airlines) with a marketing department, a legal department to monitor contracts and of course executives for "strategic thinking". Absolutely NO expensive airplanes or pesky employees and their freaking unions

Oh wait

RockyMtMadDog

It would not have mattered with PTIX above $6B. The only portion considered for conversion was $2.5B to $6.0B. That's a fixed amount that would have been converted to a fixed pay raise. We would still have received 20% PS on every dollar over $6B, whether $6B, $28B or $100B.

sailingfun

It's amazing how uninformed many pilots are about the profit sharing.

Ed Harley

I'm amazed by the number of pilots that don't seem to understand math.
I'm fine with people that voted "no" because they felt it wasn't enough. But I get so frustrated with pilots that try to tell me that we'll be richer by voting the TA down and living with our current TA.

RockyMtMadDog

^^^^^^^Exactly.^^^^^^^

Raging white

Nobody is saying that. They are saying the current contract has enough value to them while we try again.

Straw man

iFlyer

THAT'S the problem with you - you are tinkering with something we ALREADY have, and ALREADY earned, and calling it a pay raise. It's not a pay raise.

It's just a conversion. And a diversion.

A diversion to get our mind off of thinking about how minuscule a real "pay raise" we were really getting, and puff it up.

And the real pay raise was not a pay raise, just a COLA bump, which arguably, is not even abreast of real-time buying power inflation.

So stop the nonsense. Get a real pay raise first. (Do we have to define that? It means getting significantly higher W-2 - without having to give something up)

Then you can tinker with a conversion.


...And even then, it's not truly a raise - it's just getting us back to where we were before.