Overall too I think the choice of candidates going into the DGI will be much different than the ones in the SSP, not trying to rain on their parade but I’ve met a lot of guys in the SSP and I thought to myself well no duh they didn’t get the job, but more good ones too. The guys going out for the DGI were not ones that went through 9/11 and a bankruptsy. I think the preparedness and the attitude will be a lot better. People assuming its a hand shake deal this time through will be assuming that on their own. Will Very good candidates not get the job? Most definitely, but I think the success rate will be much higher. People already calling it a failure when literally nobody has done it yet Is foolish. I can tell we have a lot of mathematicians here at endeavor but until I see some actual data I’m going to keep an open mind

 

While I hope you right, I have a problem with the math.
The MAXIMUM we will send is 180 per year. ( This is from the section that states the lesser of 33% or 180.) If we send the maximum number per month 24 (Minimum) and there is no pool only CJO's. The success rate will be 180/288 = 63% success rate.

I think that the first few months will be a high success rate (If we prepare). But when the months that submit at least 24 are in full swing. The rates will be low.

I think someone earlier did the same math, but I'm repeating it again.
I hope we can know before hand how many they are submitting. I think the odds are against those of us in the top of the hiring bell curve. We will have to see.

 

Elsewhere in the document I saw language that basically “guaranteed” a 1 year pool.

“If on January 1st of any calendar year there are fewer than one hundred eighty (180) DGI CJO holders either eligible or remaining to move to Delta, monthly movement of those Pilots will be evenly divided into twelve months.”

Not quite sure how to interpret it but it looks like they’re expecting to build a pool and keep people around.

I thought the DGI was supposed to be pool free. If they added one, the success rates better be higher than OTS interviews / DGI otherwise a lot of people will leave. People will not wait around for a 40% chance to go to Delta and then wait a year.

 

Speaking of 401k, if we are not fully vested, do we lose that amount when we head to Delta? Related but on a much less important topic do we keep our same pass eligibility date for travel or do we receive a new one?

 

Yes lose the non-vested amount, and no pass eligibility date starts anew.

(That sound you hear is the AA WO's laughing at us)

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

This is an excellent question and I have an answer for you. First of all, you should always check with a CPA or fee-based financial planner. But here’s my layman’s answer. When going to delta, if you don’t have a large amount of 401k cash (which if not fully vested, you probably don’t), you SHOULD roll it over indeed. Provided it’s not a large amount, and if you’re younger than mid-thirties, I’d roll it over into a Roth IRA not affiliated with an employer. Remember, only the portion that is not vested will go to 9E. All your contributions stay yours. Finally, you could leave that money in the 9E plan until it’s vested and then roll it over.

For others whom have a large amount of vested contributions and switch jobs, a simple rollover to the new employers plan is good enough.

 

I generally agree with you TalkTurkey, in this case I have some additional clarifications...

If you roll your 401K to a Roth IRA, you will generate a tax bill at your current marginal rate. If you've got 10k and in a 25% bracket, it's a $2,500 tax bill. If you've got 50k and a 25% bracket it's a $12,500 tax bill, certainly something to consider before you make that conversion. As well, you need to have that money outside of your 401k, if you pay the conversion tax bill out of the 401k itself you would also pay a 10% early withdraw penalty.

Lastly, at the point you terminate your employment with Endeavor your vesting schedule is frozen where it is regardless of whether you roll your plan at that point. I.e. if you're 50% vested and roll immediately, that's the same as if you left it for 3 more years and then rolled. You don't continue to vest.

 

Copy that. So non-vested is lost. That’s understood. When I rolled over my money, I got no bill of any sort. I know when I retire, the initial rollover amount as reported to IRS will be taxed at my applicable rate. That’s understood. But that money, since rolled into an IRA has been invested many times over and has produced a lot more value in gains and dividends which in an IRA are not taxable.

So let’s say I rolled over that 10k and will await the 2500 tax bill. That 10k has multiplied a few times over in my IRA and all I have to pay is that measly 2500. Sold.

 

And that is the reason why the IRS in my opinion will want to get their cut. Laws can be changed

 

Again, I don't disagree that a) rolling out of your former employer's plan and b) converting a traditional (tax deferred) 401k or IRA to a Roth IRA makes good sense for many (certainly everyone under 30 but even up to 50). I'm simply providing clarification that if you convert to a Roth then you create a tax bill in the year of conversion.

As always tax bills and credits are net over a year, so if you converted a 401k to a Roth TalkTurkey it's possible that you net your conversion tax against what would have been a refund from overwithholding that year.

Just something for guys to consider. That tax bill cannot be deferred without penalties and interest from the IRS. You will pay the tax in the year of conversion.

If you're clever in your tax planning the best years to convert would be low income years (whether that's a year your wife doesn't work, or a year that you train).

As you mentioned, consult a paid CPA for the best advice.