Originally Posted by JamesBond (Post 2136111)

Logic mostly. And my asking Ed won't solve anything. This is something that will be negotiated. I am just asking the question if you can seperate yourself from the emotional issue and believe that full retro at some point past the amendable date is really achievable. If you want to turn it into the usual kind of verbal beat down then forgive me for asking.

Originally Posted by JamesBond (Post 2136080)

So let's do some cocktail napkin math. In public. If we negotiate a contract that will take effect on Jan 1 2017 with a 20% pay increase. Too low, I know. But if that is the case, do you honestly believe that management will write a check for an additional 20% over what we made in 2016? What do you think is their limit on this? I have no idea, but as time goes on that number will be getting smaller and smaller. So I think it depends on how much they are willing to pay us going forward but adding in the retro pay dilutes that amount. So now we have retro pay in addition to the huge profit sharing check we are gonna get for the next couple of years. I'll hang up and listen. Should be interesting.

Originally Posted by JamesBond (Post 2136111)

Logic mostly. And my asking Ed won't solve anything. This is something that will be negotiated. I am just asking the question if you can seperate yourself from the emotional issue and believe that full retro at some point past the amendable date is really achievable.

Originally Posted by JamesBond (Post 2136113)

How do you figure?

Originally Posted by DALFA (Post 2136222)

You know what would be really interesting is to propose that annual raises be equal in percentage as YoY increase in total compensation of the CEO, President, & CFO (whichever is greater). That could make things interesting...

Originally Posted by OldFlyGuy (Post 2136265)

If Ed isn't planning for it he can take out a loan. Yes, its a bunch of money so all the more reason to get this done. OFG

Originally Posted by OldFlyGuy (Post 2136265)

Honestly, I don't think my read of our group is that bad. DAL knows they are going to have to pay a minimum of UAL rates retro to Jan 1. With billions of stock buyback $ down a rat hole, dividend increased to 81ct/share during negotiations (ie The whole 70% thing) mgmt set the standard. They have rewarded themselves and the shareholders generously. I'm at $48 hr less than UAL and have a week less vacation. UAL kept their profit sharing formula. Do you honestly think at this point 51% are going to accept less than UAL and less than full retro? If Ed isn't planning for it he can take out a loan. Yes, its a bunch of money so all the more reason to get this done. OFG

Originally Posted by WhatNow (Post 2136290)

I would expect retro to at least the TA1 rates. They were higher on average then UAL.

Originally Posted by WhatNow (Post 2136290)

I would expect retro to at least the TA1 rates. They were higher on average then UAL.

Originally Posted by WhatNow (Post 2136290)

I would expect retro to at least the TA1 rates. They were higher on average then UAL.

Originally Posted by WhatNow (Post 2136290)

I would expect retro to at least the TA1 rates. They were higher on average then UAL.