3B4 Kiss at midnight
01-16-2016 | 09:57 AM
#31
Straight QOL, homie
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 4,202
Likes: 1
From: Record-Shattering Profit Facilitator
Going on 7 months now without those draconian concessions and neutered PS formula.
Work rule giveaways never come back. As the pilot group shifts away from baby boomers, you and the rest of the management and ALPA national toadies had damn well better understand younger generations place a much higher value on QOL than straight rates.
And remember, the top rate applies to what, less than 600 out of 13000 pilots?
Work rule giveaways never come back. As the pilot group shifts away from baby boomers, you and the rest of the management and ALPA national toadies had damn well better understand younger generations place a much higher value on QOL than straight rates.
And remember, the top rate applies to what, less than 600 out of 13000 pilots?
01-16-2016 | 10:11 AM
#32
Banned
Joined: Dec 2015
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
The company committed to a response in January. They are waiting to the last business day of the month. They are putting zero effort into the negotiations and intend to drag it out as long as possible. Plan and act accordingly.
01-16-2016 | 10:52 AM
#33
New Hire
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
From: ATL 320A
*************************
The initial 8% hourly pay increase in the TA is significantly offset by the JV production balance, sick leave, and productivity concessions. Next year, the 6% is almost totally offset by the profit sharing conversion (assuming a PTIX of at least $6 billion), but we get about 1% more in vacation and training pay. Any raises granted to more than 30% of our fellow employees will be matched for us, up to 3% annually. In all, we realistically stand to not realize the initial net increase and probably not much more, if any.
Council 1 Captain Jon Lewis, Chairman First Officer Eric Hall, Vice Chairman
Council 20 Captain Bill Bartels, Chairman First Officer Rich Wheeler, Vice Chairman Captain Tom Bell, Secretary-Treasurer Council 54 Captain Jud Crane, Chairman First Officer Roger Goodwin, SecretaryTreasurer Council 66 Captain Tom Brielmann, Chairman First Officer Chris Hazleton, Vice Chairman Council 108 First Officer Ryan Schnitzler, Vice Chairman
**************************
After the TA failed, the Negotiating Committee Chairman challenged any of those named at the bottom of this statement to provide proof of the speculative financial impact analysis and not a single one of them could give an explanation based on facts. Several of them were asked during their own LEC meetings to provide the proof and, again, they could not.
The only defense they had was their admission that the statement was provided by a third party and none of them had come up with this analysis, but they believed it to be true, nonetheless, and published it.
It was a pure conjecture and it was published by this group in an effort to bolster the vote against the TA.
The initial 8% hourly pay increase in the TA is significantly offset by the JV production balance, sick leave, and productivity concessions. Next year, the 6% is almost totally offset by the profit sharing conversion (assuming a PTIX of at least $6 billion), but we get about 1% more in vacation and training pay. Any raises granted to more than 30% of our fellow employees will be matched for us, up to 3% annually. In all, we realistically stand to not realize the initial net increase and probably not much more, if any.
Council 1 Captain Jon Lewis, Chairman First Officer Eric Hall, Vice Chairman
Council 20 Captain Bill Bartels, Chairman First Officer Rich Wheeler, Vice Chairman Captain Tom Bell, Secretary-Treasurer Council 54 Captain Jud Crane, Chairman First Officer Roger Goodwin, SecretaryTreasurer Council 66 Captain Tom Brielmann, Chairman First Officer Chris Hazleton, Vice Chairman Council 108 First Officer Ryan Schnitzler, Vice Chairman
**************************
After the TA failed, the Negotiating Committee Chairman challenged any of those named at the bottom of this statement to provide proof of the speculative financial impact analysis and not a single one of them could give an explanation based on facts. Several of them were asked during their own LEC meetings to provide the proof and, again, they could not.
The only defense they had was their admission that the statement was provided by a third party and none of them had come up with this analysis, but they believed it to be true, nonetheless, and published it.
It was a pure conjecture and it was published by this group in an effort to bolster the vote against the TA.
However, in 2017, the PS reductions would have taken effect, virtually eliminating the 6% 2016 raise. This combined with the 2017 raise of 3% would have actually yielded a paycut for 2017 vs. 2016.
It really matters not, as the proposed TA was rejected overwhelmingly. The Negotiating Committee has put forward a proposal with substantially more value for the Delta pilots.
Jim Villers
P2P Chairman
01-16-2016 | 10:59 AM
#35
The Brown Dot +1
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,775
Likes: 0
From: 777B
That there is some incredible spin. You must have a part time job as JJs spinmeister.
Just admit it. The information put out in that Joint Comm was misleading and a fabrication. Because if your vote was determined by those fabrications, then you cast an uninformed vote.
Here's another misleading fabrication:
Joint Comm:
“Between the hourly pay increase and reduced profit sharing payout from 2016, the average pilot will realize a cut in total 2017 compensation of some 2% below his 2016 earnings under current PTIX projections, and his 2018 earnings will be only 1% above that of 2016.”
Rebuttal:
"This is a complete fabrication. Whoever wrote this is trimming the facts to fit their agenda. This faulty analysis fails to take into account the two past changes in pay rates in 2015 combined with the TA pay rate changes."
You would have earned increasing pay every year over the status quo with the TA, regardless of PTIX.
The pilot group as a whole lost $113.4 million in contractual value from July 1st-December 31st. We made 8% less for the last 6 months of 2015, therefore our slice of PS pie is smaller and when determining our FLT and Advance pay to enter into determining our February PS, well that's less too. IOW, we will have a smaller PS check this year. Oh yeah, I'm also making 14.5% less this year until we get another deal, whenever that may be.
Don't worry, the authors of the joint comm promised that they would immediately reengage. Going on 7 months now without a pay raise and counting.
Just admit it. The information put out in that Joint Comm was misleading and a fabrication. Because if your vote was determined by those fabrications, then you cast an uninformed vote.
Here's another misleading fabrication:
Joint Comm:
“Between the hourly pay increase and reduced profit sharing payout from 2016, the average pilot will realize a cut in total 2017 compensation of some 2% below his 2016 earnings under current PTIX projections, and his 2018 earnings will be only 1% above that of 2016.”
Rebuttal:
"This is a complete fabrication. Whoever wrote this is trimming the facts to fit their agenda. This faulty analysis fails to take into account the two past changes in pay rates in 2015 combined with the TA pay rate changes."
You would have earned increasing pay every year over the status quo with the TA, regardless of PTIX.
The pilot group as a whole lost $113.4 million in contractual value from July 1st-December 31st. We made 8% less for the last 6 months of 2015, therefore our slice of PS pie is smaller and when determining our FLT and Advance pay to enter into determining our February PS, well that's less too. IOW, we will have a smaller PS check this year. Oh yeah, I'm also making 14.5% less this year until we get another deal, whenever that may be.
Don't worry, the authors of the joint comm promised that they would immediately reengage. Going on 7 months now without a pay raise and counting.
01-16-2016 | 11:08 AM
#36
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 4,116
Likes: 1
Spilt milk.
Bottom line.... the failed TA was sorely lacking in both value and equity.
Fortunately.... and in spite of the determined efforts of our very expensive CBA ...the majority of the pilot group was not convinced otherwise.
While our CBA operatives may now express the opinion the present counter represents substantially improved value...... my money is the majority of this group has the perspective it barely reaches the threshold of acceptability.
Bottom line.... the failed TA was sorely lacking in both value and equity.
Fortunately.... and in spite of the determined efforts of our very expensive CBA ...the majority of the pilot group was not convinced otherwise.
While our CBA operatives may now express the opinion the present counter represents substantially improved value...... my money is the majority of this group has the perspective it barely reaches the threshold of acceptability.
01-16-2016 | 12:48 PM
#37
Sick of whiners
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 507
Likes: 0
From: 767 VEOP
I believe that to be incorrect- could you provide a quote of the TA language showing that 2016 PS earnings were unaffected by the failed TA?
The Feb 2016 "payout" (for 2015 profits) was untouched by the failed TA, but, as I recall, the "accrual" in 2016, to be paid in Feb 2017 would have been reduced by the failed TA.
-
Last edited by KnotSoFast; 01-16-2016 at 01:06 PM.
01-16-2016 | 01:21 PM
#38
Sick of whiners
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 507
Likes: 0
From: 767 VEOP
....To state that the 1/1/16 6% raise would be totally offset by the Profit Sharing giveback is inaccurate. The PS plan was untouched for the 2016 earnings year with a normal payout in February 2017. So for the 2016 earnings year, there would have been a 6% raise on earnings NOT offset by PS reductions.
However, in 2017, the PS reductions would have taken effect, virtually eliminating the 6% 2016 raise. .....
Jim Villers
P2P Chairman
However, in 2017, the PS reductions would have taken effect, virtually eliminating the 6% 2016 raise. .....
Jim Villers
P2P Chairman
OK, I found it in the TA language and believe I am correct, that the failed TA would have reduced the formula being used RIGHT NOW, IN 2016, that will be paid out in Feb 2017.
The point of this post is not to gloat, however. A larger issue is --
How could a "P2P Chairman" make such a glaring error? . . . Still trying to sell that old TA, eh?
-
Last edited by KnotSoFast; 06-26-2020 at 05:06 AM.
01-16-2016 | 01:49 PM
#39
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 2,960
Likes: 0
From: Power top
01-16-2016 | 02:17 PM
#40
Da Hudge
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,473
Likes: 0
From: Poodle Whisperer
The initial 8% raise was offset by some concessions that would probably be quantified in the 1-2% range. To state that the 1/1/16 6% raise would be totally offset by the Profit Sharing giveback is inaccurate. The PS plan was untouched for the 2016 earnings year with a normal payout in February 2017. So for the 2016 earnings year, there would have been a 6% raise on earnings NOT offset by PS reductions.
However, in 2017, the PS reductions would have taken effect, virtually eliminating the 6% 2016 raise. This combined with the 2017 raise of 3% would have actually yielded a paycut for 2017 vs. 2016.
It really matters not, as the proposed TA was rejected overwhelmingly. The Negotiating Committee has put forward a proposal with substantially more value for the Delta pilots.
Jim Villers
P2P Chairman
However, in 2017, the PS reductions would have taken effect, virtually eliminating the 6% 2016 raise. This combined with the 2017 raise of 3% would have actually yielded a paycut for 2017 vs. 2016.
It really matters not, as the proposed TA was rejected overwhelmingly. The Negotiating Committee has put forward a proposal with substantially more value for the Delta pilots.
Jim Villers
P2P Chairman
I really appreciate the reform you're trying to do with P2P, though!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
