First Quarter Financials
 

Record profits across the board:

American Airlines: 932 Million

United Airlines: 508 Million

Delta: 746 Million

Southwest: 453 Million

Alaska: 149 Million

I'll update the rest when they become available. JetBlue, Spirit and Virgin post results in about a week.

Allegiant $108.1 mil
Hawaiian $25.9 mil

Here's a few charts to go along with the earnings release(s).

US after-tax corp. profit (red) vs. US Private sector employee after-tax earnings (blue)...

http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c8...age_pergdp.jpg

http://www.faireconomy.org/files/ima...atorChange.gif

https://www.americanprogress.org/wp-...fig1_41205.jpg


The next time your multi-million dollar salaried CEO/mgmt team asks for union concessions, tell your reps to go to the next meeting with these charts, along with your company's financials, and demand to know why.

American earned record profits in 2014, with CEO Doug Parker receiving a $687,884 salary,"maximum" incentive payments of $4.2 million, stock awards valued at $7 million, and $414,092 in other payments, according to The Associated Press.

$7 million
$4.2 million
$687,884
$414,092
---------
$12,301,976 for 2014 (1 year :eek:)

He now wants to get paid in company stock, alone.

American Airlines CEO to be paid entirely in company stock

April 6, 2015

DALLAS (AP) — Southwest Airlines earned a record profit last year and the CEO benefited with a 24% increase in compensation, to $5 million.

Southwest Airlines CEO gets 24% boost in compensation

Mods any chance of getting this reposted on the regional thread?

April 25, 2014

United Airlines CEO Jeff Smisek saw his total compensation fall 15 percent to $8.1 million last year, according to a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission late Friday.

The filing comes a day after the airline's parent, United Continental Holdings, reported a steep fourth-quarter loss it blamed on bad weather.

Smiisek took home a salary of $975,000, the same as the year before. The value of his stock awards increased to $5.7 million from $3.1 million in 2012. But his performance-based bonus slid to $1.2 million from $3.5 million the year before.

The value of his perks also fell, to $168,540 from $302,377 in 2012. Those perks included insurance premiums paid by the company, an executive physical, contributions to his 401(k) plan, financial planning and tax services, a car allowance, airport parking, free flights and on-board meals.


United Airlines CEO's pay package falls 15 percent - tribunedigital-chicagotribune

April 30, 2014

Delta Air Lines Inc. gave CEO Richard Anderson a 14 percent boost in total compensation in 2014, the same year the airline posted a $10.5 billion profit.

According to a proxy filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Wednesday, Delta (NYSE: DAL) rewarded Anderson with about $14.4 million in total comp last year, including a $725,000 salary (up 11 percent), $8.9 million in stock awards (up 27 percent), $2 million in stock options (flat) and $2.4 million in non-equity incentive plan compensation (down 11 percent).

Anderson’s perks included $20,500 for financial planning services, home security services, the cost of an annual physical examination and flight benefits; and $28,190 reimbursement for taxes.

Delta CEO Anderson?s total comp rises to $14.4 million - Atlanta Business Chronicle

Profit sharing isnt the right way to pay employees that don't have an affect on profits. Or something like that. Right?

ALK Alaska Air Group Inc Executive Compensation

Total comp up 25.59% in 2014

Perhaps he's smart enough to realize he can defer capital gains taxes and thereby improve his overall take-home via compounded annual returns that way?

Who knows...he may just be clever enough to know how to hedge his portfolio and sell covered calls against his holdings, too, further improving his returns.

If you cant beat them, join them! Follow the money. It all goes to stockholders after the fat cats. Make your stock plays and smoke your cigars. The little guy NEVER wins.

Stock gains are only taxed at 15%, that's why Warren Buffet pays a lesser tax rate then his secretary. Even Warren says our tax structure is messed up!

How about a 'flat tax' where everyone, top to bottom, pays the same rate, no deductions, no write offs, nothing. We could eliminate the entire IRS tomorrow.

I say sliding scale....adjusted for use of fed dollars and income level...3% to 18%.....

Some big dollars are fighting against anything that makes taxes easier:

How the Maker of TurboTax Fought Free, Simple Tax Filing - ProPublica

Correction:

No little guy with an attitude and a mind-set like that ever won, because he quit before he ever tried. The same holds true for the little guy who tried, failed, and then quit because he/she allowed themselves to adopt that attitude and mind-set.

We can thank the good Lord above that folks like America's Founding Fathers, George Washington, Martin Luther King, Jr., etc. never fell for that BS.

USAPA had it's faults but at least they weren't dumb enough to give up profit sharing.

A flat tax raisea taxes on lower income people and lowers taxes for the very wealthy. It's the opposite of what we need. Our current progressive tax system is complicated but logical. If you are raising a family on 35,000 a year, you get a lower rate and deductions to help you. If you are single and making 500,000 you pay a lot in taxes...exactly how it should be. The things that make the system so damn complicated are there for a reason. The guy raising a family on 35k is spending every dime he makes to support the family (housing, food, education) takes up all the income. The guy making 500k is spending a tiny fraction of his income on the essentials, and thus should have plenty of money left over to pay taxes.

A flat tax is nothing but a pipe dream for the very high income makers.

Get a job, hippie ;)

Having children is a choice. If you choose to have children you cannot afford, it is not society's problem.

The tax rate argument is a twisted liberal argument designed to foster class division.

/sympathy

The govt reward you for having children, by way of tax breaks. Having children is essential for an economy to grow. The tax code is not written to create class division...

If the guy making 500k can't afford to pay his taxes its a result of his choices too. Our progressive tax policy is here to stay. Flat tax is not happening

Most of the money you pay in taxes is totally wasted by the government, or stolen through fraud. Very very very little goes toward making a real difference, less than 1%. Liberals talk like the government is benevolent or something, when the exact opposite extreme is true.

Amen. Everyone needs to pay their fair share. I shouldn't have to pay in more to subsidize a bunch of lazy bums who can't get off their butts and work. Everyone has an opportunity for success in this country. People that are successfull shouldn't be penalized. Flat tax now!

Do you look as stupid as you act? Not BS....you go right ahead with your pompous attitude boy........go get em!

Wow. fantastic profit.

good thing the pilots granted so many concessions.

For a quick snapshot, in 2014...

United CEO Jeff Smisek was paid $12,762,226 in 2014, up from $8,138,305 in '13. (Yes, that's $20+ million for 24 mo's work, or $860,000 PER MONTH :eek:)
AA CEO Doug Parker was paid $12,301,976, including $687,884 in salary in 2014.
SWA CEO Gary Kelly was paid $5,002,785, including $675,000 in salary.
Alaska CEO Bradley Tilden was paid $3,468,722, including $436,769 in salary.
JetBlue CEO Dave Barger was paid $1,459,636, including $600,000 in salary.
Hawaiian CEO Mark Dunkerley was paid $3,103,945, including salary of $655,625.
Virgin Am CEO David Cush was paid $4,628,757, including salary of $665,000.


Delta, Spirit and Allegiant have not yet issued their proxy statements.


United Continental boss paid $12.8 million in 2014 | | Dallas Morning News


http://s3.amazonaws.com/rapgenius/v8...errari_w1.jpeg

Yes! A non-partisan issue! Reported on today, in fact...

-------------------------------
The Inspector General at the Office of Personnel Management discovered $601 million dollars that were paid to federal retirees in 2011, even though the retirees actually had died during one of the prior five years.

“Every day, we have hard choices to make on how to spend limited taxpayer dollars. Not spending them on Social Security payments for people who have passed away is an easy choice,” said Rep. Reid Ribble (R-WI).

More recently, a government hearing last month exposed that 6.5 million individuals with active social security numbers are older than 112-years-old.:eek:

A “60 Minutes investigation” uncovered identity theft due to the erroneous federal record keeping.

Rep. Cheri Bustos (D-IL) said, “It’s unacceptable that the federal government spends hundreds of millions of dollars each year in improper payments to deceased people.”
--------------------------------


How To Cut Federal Spending? Lawmakers Say Stop Paying Dead People

Frankly, I have no problem with some tax break for having children. But not for every one. Your argument concerning the economic requirements for having children is just silly. It is consumerism that makes the economy grow. If people had so many children that they were totally in survival mode of spending, that does nothing to grow the likes of Nike and GM or even DAL for that matter because Joe 6pack is spending every nickle on food and shelter. If a family can produce enough income to have 5 kids, go for it, have a ball. If you cannot afford them, you are a drain on society, not a benefit to it.

And your point is?

They drive the Ferrari for girls.

Not really, no.

40% of US GDP is related to government spending (local, state, federal). The R's talk big about cutting spending but even they can't bring themselves to actually do it. The "Tea Party" doesn't fully understand the ramifications of how we've set up our currency (debt in reality becomes money, reduce debt you reduce your money supply, reducing economic development).

Taxes at the federal level serve a few purposes 1) a way to control inflation - print too much money (issue debt) and inflation increases. Do too little of it and the economy contracts. 2) Incentivize behavior such as home buying and child rearing.

Look at Japan's issue with an aging/declining population and the methods they are trying to employ to reverse it!

What you'll find is most higher educated, higher earning adults vote Democrat. The Republic base is the lower educated, and poorer areas of our country (just look at the Fox News demographics!). I always laugh when pilots, whom tend to be higher educated and earn more than your average worker (except maybe for the commuter guys) identify with the Republican base.

The reason that children are good for the economy is that they eventually get jobs of their own, and contribute to the economy. While they are kids, their parents have to spend a lot to raise them. Economies with a declining population do terribly (Japan)

Having kids is a huge boost to the economy. Kids are expensive and then they grow up, get a job and pay taxes to pay for their parents Medicare and SS. Thus, the govt rewards patents for having kids by way of tax breaks. It's just the way the system is

It's not the increase in the population that is the problem.

Yes, it's the decrease in population that is causing deflationary pressure in Japan, or rather contributing to it.

You like kids, I get it. Have all you want, but pay for them yourself.

That's how you screw a population, divide them up over arbitrary issues, and then steal their money. That's exactly what is happening. The divide between D and R, is over social issues, not financial.

A great example is the debate of whether or not global warming is real. It's hilarious for me to watch because it doesn't matter if it is real or not. So the Earth is warming, who cares, the negative effects are a huge lie. The place I'm sitting at right now had two miles thick of ice on top of it not to long ago. When Niagara Falls reaches lake Erie, the Great Lakes will drain away, give me billions to save them. Welcome to planet Earth.

Thanks Keith. Way to help unify the pilot group. I bet you're a joy to be around.


































http://www.troll.me/images/stifler-t...as-sarcasm.jpg

....and no one ever in the history of history has ever had kids and THEN fallen on hard times?

Then there are certain institutions that are against practicing birth control....

Having kids is not as simple as "can we afford a child for the next 18+ years?"
If YES, then have kid
If No, do not have kid

Married 7 years, no kids.

But I recognize the economic benefit a growing population entails.

So in your mind, a negative population growth is something the government would be okay with?

The government ponzi scheme depends upon population growth.

I, however do agree about the drain on society part. The wrong demographics are doing most of the breeding.