DALPA Communication - Other employee groups
09-16-2016 | 01:07 PM
#21
Moderator
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,252
Likes: 95
From: DAL 330
Maybe I am reading you wrong or my whole misunderstanding of this issue is incorrect (wouldn't be the first time) but here is how I understand it:
Yes - management can give themselves as large a bonus as they want. But to eliminate PS they would have to totally eliminate profit. Currently any increase in management bonuses would directly reduce the company profit level as an expense.
If this provision remains in the TA the bonus/compensation would not reduce profits but would come out of the pool of employee profit sharing which would have zero effect on profits but just reduce the PS paid to employees.
That is the kicker - it would be essentially "Free" money because unlike any current bonuses it would not affect the bottom line.
If this is incorrect I am sure that I will be politely corrected in .000001 seconds.
Scoop
09-16-2016 | 01:49 PM
#22
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,869
Likes: 188
Maybe I am reading you wrong or my whole misunderstanding of this issue is incorrect (wouldn't be the first time) but here is how I understand it:
Yes - management can give themselves as large a bonus as they want. But to eliminate PS they would have to totally eliminate profit. Currently any increase in management bonuses would directly reduce the company profit level as an expense.
If this provision remains in the TA the bonus/compensation would not reduce profits but would come out of the pool of employee profit sharing which would have zero effect on profits but just reduce the PS paid to employees.
That is the kicker - it would be essentially "Free" money because unlike any current bonuses it would not affect the bottom line.
If this is incorrect I am sure that I will be politely corrected in .000001 seconds.
Scoop
Yes - management can give themselves as large a bonus as they want. But to eliminate PS they would have to totally eliminate profit. Currently any increase in management bonuses would directly reduce the company profit level as an expense.
If this provision remains in the TA the bonus/compensation would not reduce profits but would come out of the pool of employee profit sharing which would have zero effect on profits but just reduce the PS paid to employees.
That is the kicker - it would be essentially "Free" money because unlike any current bonuses it would not affect the bottom line.
If this is incorrect I am sure that I will be politely corrected in .000001 seconds.
Scoop
You are incorrect. The proposed change is to count all management compensation including equity as a business expense. It does not come directly out of the PS pool. Equity would simply be treated like current compensation and bonuses.
09-16-2016 | 03:42 PM
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 12,823
Likes: 168
From: window seat
Clearly the ONLY reason is it allows them an easier path to reduce the PS dollars we get by increasing their own already asinine levels of compensation (up what, 700%+ in the last decade or so?)
Nope. Total poison pill.
09-16-2016 | 05:32 PM
#24
Moderator
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,252
Likes: 95
From: DAL 330
OK. So management "must have" changes nothing? Now you can see why I am confused. I will do some research into this.
Scoop
09-16-2016 | 10:35 PM
#25
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,869
Likes: 188
It would decrease the overall profit of the airline thus reducing profit sharing. Over the last 4 years it has averaged about 75 million a year or less impact then the computer outage. It's a cost item like anything else.
09-17-2016 | 06:36 AM
#26
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 13,230
Likes: 678
From: ir.delta.com
$252,899,500 was the amount of equity compensation registered in July.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/d...0/delta_s8.htm
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/d...0/delta_s8.htm
09-17-2016 | 06:53 AM
#27
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,869
Likes: 188
$252,899,500 was the amount of equity compensation registered in July.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/d...0/delta_s8.htm
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/d...0/delta_s8.htm
09-17-2016 | 08:45 AM
#28
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 13,230
Likes: 678
From: ir.delta.com
That appears go be stock being purchased for future issuance. Even if it represents stock grants for the year it would reduce the PS pool by about 50 million dollars. The pilot share of that would be about 18 million. If we lose pensionability of the PS plan at a 25% payout level we lose between 90 and 100 million a year.
Registering this stock just adds to the market float. We are buying back with the 2 authorizations of billions of dollars and this just puts more stock right back out on the market.
09-20-2016 | 08:17 AM
#29
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 12,823
Likes: 168
From: window seat
That appears go be stock being purchased for future issuance. Even if it represents stock grants for the year it would reduce the PS pool by about 50 million dollars. The pilot share of that would be about 18 million. If we lose pensionability of the PS plan at a 25% payout level we lose between 90 and 100 million a year.
They can not, under any circumstance, be given the levers to reduce our PS unilaterally without limit, only regulated by how much they choose to pay themselves. Pulling numbers based on current behaviors without such a system is completely irrelevant.
We better start thinking they WILL do whatever they can possibly do to take money from us, rather than living in best case scenario land. This applies to scope too.
09-21-2016 | 06:16 AM
#30
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
$252,899,500 was the amount of equity compensation registered in July.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/d...0/delta_s8.htm
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/d...0/delta_s8.htm
Right or wrong?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
