Using figures in our contract, the ALPA website, the Q&A, the FICA website and the IRS website, I was wondering how much increase in pay a 5 yr NB FO would have after getting the raise---but paying all the extra expenses I could think of (as a result of this TA and taxes etc. ). I picked 2018 for raises. I did not include longevity pay increases -- just evaluated the TA increases for same year.

5 yr NB FO --- assuming 1000 yr per year (83.33 per month)
Hourly pay $ 132.01 Currently.

5 yr NB FO -- 2018
Hourly pay $158.68. An increase of $26.67 per hour (20.2% increase)
10% for 2015 and 3% each for 2016, 17, and 18.

Effective raise. Minus 31% on increase for federal income tax (Irs web for income level averaged). Minus 9.3% for state income tax (varies per state). Minus 0% for social security (he is already maxed out before raise). Minus 2% for Union dues. Minus 1.45% for Medicare. Minus .65% for disability (FDX MEC plan).

He ends up with an effective increase of $14.83 per hour after these taxes and fees on the increase.

Minus $54.16 per month increase for VEBA (or 1.15 per hour minus current $.50 per hour). Minus $185.15 per month increased premium for family buy up plan ( alpa projection).

Results in $11.96 per hour effective raise minus govt and TA fee increases. (e.g. Has the same plans he has now).

$11.96/132.01= 9.06 % increase after 4 TA raises

Results in an effective raise of 2.26% per raise ( including the initial 10% raise. Or he 2.26% better with new TA with the same medical and disability as he has now.

This does NOT account for inflation or the "signing bonus".
It also doesn't include longevity-- but he gets that on both current contract and TA.

DEPENDING upon the inflation rate, even a very conservative one of 3%, he could actually end up BEHIND where he is now--- even with all our raises.

 

Using logic and facts will get you nowhere around this place (APC, FDX or in this business).

There are LOTS of jobs where logic matters, many employers value employees that think that way. Experience has taught me that it's not that way around here. We have a LOT of smart folks around here. Management honestly doesn't want to hear from them (that's sad and disappointing). We're lucky enough to have a few of them working for the union.

Smart Managers surrounds themselves with smart people that make them look smart. Around here, it seems that Management surrounds themselves with stupid people to make them look smart?

Just ... shut up and color!*?

 

Per diem? International override (yeah, some 75 trips are international). Why 9.3% for state income tax? I don't believe that is average. I believe it is a lot highet than average. And if you are looking for exact numbers (you seem to be) why not calculate the impact of maximizing your pre tax deductions?
Also, why quit with the lowest paying seat in the lowest paying airplane? Why not do that for all seats and determine a mean for all 4000+ FedEx pilots. Over the course of 6-10 years, that will probably be a more useful number for a crew force in which a majority won't remain in the right seat of the 75 for the duration of the contract.

 

The 9.3% is for that income range in CA. it wasn't average for the U.S. People would need to determine their rate. PerDiem isn't much different but you can include it-- extra.10 or .15 cents. International override adds $1 per credit hour and is taxable. So add .69 minus your state tax rate minus Union dues etc. I picked 757 FO albeit at a higher year because that's what the Q&A Alpa medical cost projection used.

But I did indeed do it for other seats at random. Take away the 9.3% completely if you are from Florida Tenn etc. Remember to change average to 34% for federal if making over 230000. Also add 0.9% to Medicare tax if making over 200k. But in every case the raise is lower.

 

Aren't you forgetting to do all of those calculations to our current rates? Seems to me you can't apply them just to the new rates. You have to apply them to our current rates also to make a valid comparison.

But then... I have a degree in Aeronautical Science.

 

I was looking at what the true raise would be by applying fees and taxes to the raise. I applied the increased taxes and fees to the increased wages using the lower to mid 100K tax rates.

The result gives a truer picture of what the actual raise (as a percentage increase of the current pay) is.

 

No, it doesn't. Your methodology is wrong. You are effectively subtracting all the taxes and fees from the new payrate while not adjusting the current payrate for anything.

Example:
Current payrate: $100/hour
Future payrate: $150/hour
Payraise: $50/hour (50%)

Fed tax: 20%
State tax: 5%

Here's what you did:
$50 - 20%($10) = $40
$40 - 5%($7.50) = $32.50

Makes it a 32.5% raise.

But what you should have done is this:
Current payrate: $100
Fed tax (20%): $20
State tax (5%): $5

Net pay: $75

Future payrate: $150
Fed tax (20%): $30
State tax (5%): $7.50

Net pay: $112.50

Payraise: $37.50
$37.50/$75 = 50%

And to be fair, you didn't include the 2% B-plan bump as part of the compensation, unless you're just looking at straight net money in your bank account, not total compensation.

 

What airline is this for?

 

I see. So we should all request pay cuts so we don't pay so much in taxes. Good plan.

 

You know that's not his point. Simply showing how underwhelming the pay "raise" is.