I understand the idea but the fact is that those of us with no DB plan are getting the lagged DC contribution until 2012 as a result and we arent part of the DB payouts.

Also if we hire before 2012 than those newhires will be getting a higher DC contribution than we are, which is the problem.

 

I agree, my point was mainly to point out that a good chunk of us on the NWA side arent getting much at all towards retirement. You guys get the 12% and some of our guys have a frozen plan and smaller contribution until 2012. BUT the majority of us on the bottom half of the NWA list dont have a frozen plan and or dont get the 12% until 2012 while we play "catchup". So from now until 2012 I'm getting considerably less than guys junior to me on the list that are on the DAL side.

on top of that i dont even get my longevity pay bump at DOH like whats written in the contract. We were specifically written out of getting paid the same way as the rest of the pilot group thus this complaint.

We passed resolutions to at a minimum get our pay at DOH like everyone else. the MEC shot it down and didnt even consider it even though it passed unanimously at each base it was passed.

Everyone i talk to didnt even realize this was happening and EVERYONE agrees that we should all be paid the same way per the contract, AT DOH! To write the small number of us effected out of getting paid the same way as all of you is just BS. The contract states that longevity is given on DOH so thats how it should be for ALL delta pilots.

<stepping down of pedestal>

 

YOU are flat out wrong on all counts above.

Reread the ADC dispatches to review what actually happened. There is no comparison between the UAL distribution and the DAL South distribution.

 

Tell me what part I am wrong about. Am I wrong about the 205,000 dollar FAE plus up? Am I wrong about the years of service minimum payout? Am I wrong about the overall methodology?

 

Super, this is what i was trying to state in my earlier posts but failed to put it as clearly as you did.

You stated in another post that this was brought up to the MEC and they shot it down? I didn't know that. Was there a reason given? I would really like to hear their line of thinking for throwing this out. It continues to amaze me how many people affected by this don't know anything about it. As I have stated before, it is the principle of this that pi$$es me off. The contract says pay bumps occur at DOH. What it should say is "pay bump occurs at DOH, unless you are a FNWA pilot, then your pay bump is the way it was under the old contract that doesn't exist anymore".

I understand that this only affects a handful of people, but the fact of the matter is it's a violation of the contract. I am outraged to hear that the MEC passed on the chance to fix this. I am going to try and get to the bottom of why they would do that. I'll post my findings.

 

Resolutions were passed in the DAL-N LECs last year to fix this and everytime it got to MEC it was shot down as no action taken. we basically got "we tried to get yall included under the DOH but not enough people are effected by this to try and change it." basically Tough Chit

when the agreed on the joint contract it specifically excluded us from getting paid per the contract. There was a pretty big group of us fighting this but ultimately got nowhere once it got to the MEC level

To clarify, We passed resolutions about the pay longevity as well as the DC contribution disparity, to which NOTHING was done once it got passed our LEC guys. It passed in our LECs unanimously as everyone realized it was wrong but again the DALMEC didnt even bother with looking into it.

 

You're wrong about these following statements:

The intitial distribution method on the note was to compensate pilots for the lost DB plan. They put together a set of assumptions on time value and investment performance over time to see where each pilot would end up retirement wise. They then ran the numbers based on those assumptions.
1. The result was really ugly for the junior pilots with the bottom half of the seniority list essentially getting nothing from the note.

Not true. The Notes model explains that the reasons for $205K and Years of Service Minimum Credit. It was NOT a method to target money. It was a method to equitably distribute money.

The Notes model wasn't a retirement plan, replacement plan, or a benefit plan of any type. It was a construct to deliver proceeds from the ALPA Notes. The ALPA Notes were for concessions under the contract (LOA 51). Your obvious confusion is that you believe they were a replacement for your DB, because they were made payable when the DB terminated. The reasons for the Notes was stated clearly in the contract.

2. They decided despite the fact that the numbers supported this it was politically unacceptable.

Horse Excrement! No determination of the sort was made. Reread your ADC Dispatches

3. They then decided to plus each pilot up to 205,000 dollars FAE in the old frozen plan and rerun the numbers. Even with the plus up it was still ugly for the bottom half of the list.

Wrong again. 205K was chosen because that was the maximum qualified limit anyone could have earned (IRS rule). Everyone was given equal consideration for the accrued service under that one component of the model.

4. So they added yet another feature which was a years of service minimum.


Again, this isn't the case. Years of Service was another component of the model that helped ensure equitable sharing of the returns on our concessions.

That your pension terminated wasn't a concession. It terminated because it was severely underfunded. It termination met the ERISA standards, was approved by the bankruptcy court, and certified by the PBGC. The Notes weren't a payoff for your pension. Your pension and recovery of Delta's obligation to that plan are the responsibility of the PBGC. When your pension terminated, a lot of cash that would otherwise have been required out of Delta was freed up. We took that cash through the Notes and distributed it in response to contract concessions.

 

Whistling through the litigation graveyard.

Very true.
And that freed up cash has now been obligated to the NWA pilot plan.

"It is what it is" ain't gonna cut it for 2012. The issue of retirement disparities will be huge and I think you know it.
Wishing it would just go away is a recipe for disaster.
It will be far better for DALPA to begin addressing this sooner rather than later.
It does not have to be divisive if handled objectively and with facts and data rather than emotion.

 

One thing I'm disappointed with Delta is the medical insurance. United Healthcare is only administering it for Delta - so the place to put our frustrations is at Delta, not UHC. (unless it's a matter of a claim being handled wrong).

I wish we could beef up the Delta Pilot Medical Plan or lower it's cost. It's very expensive for what appears to be not much better coverage. This is our negotiated plan, but man it's expensive. Our Silver/Gold plans are the same as the other employees - which I believe is why it's not the best plan.

I'm pretty new at Delta - can some of the "old salts" tell what it was like prior to BK? or has Delta had expensive medical for a while?

 

I remember things unfolding EXACTLY as Sailing explained.