![]() |
What bag of sh!t would the company put on the table to try and get PBS?
They throw free free parking out there we’re ****3d. |
Originally Posted by at6d
(Post 3228507)
What bag of sh!t would the company put on the table to try and get PBS?
. Would a 43% pay raise be enough to justify PBS if we could keep all of our work rules? That's 6 digits take-home for a significant chunk of our pilot group. I'm not sayin, I'm askin. |
Originally Posted by flensr
(Post 3228534)
43% pay raise did it for Spirit... Not saying it's right or would work here, but you did ask.
Would a 43% pay raise be enough to justify PBS if we could keep all of our work rules? That's 6 digits take-home for a significant chunk of our pilot group. I'm not sayin, I'm askin. |
The company has already said they are not willing to give anything for PBS. This was hashed out last contract.
|
Originally Posted by Mozam
(Post 3228552)
The company has already said they are not willing to give anything for PBS. This was hashed out last contract.
|
Originally Posted by WHACKMASTER
(Post 3228542)
A 43% increase in pay rates in exchange for PBS does not equal a 43% pay increase on your W2.
But if your W-2 says $300k now, a 43% pay raise would be fairly close to $100k/yr extra take home. You sidestepped the question with a nice little straw man counter-argument, so... is 43%, which would work out to 6 figure increase for a lot of people, enough to justify PBS like it was for Spirit? In the interest of full disclosure, that 43% was "total compensation". The pay scale didn't exactly go up 43%, they got 401k direct contribution up to 15% in addition to a few other minor gimme items that had value. It still works out to a 6 figure increase in total compensation for a lot of people no matter how you slice and dice it, and a goodly chunk of the 43% is tax sheltered, deferred, or exempt. No taxes on improved or cheaper medical benefits, no taxes on per diem rate increases because they're still below federal limits, deferred taxes on 401k direct contribution, etc. Again, 6 figures for a lot of people. Where's the threshold, pay scale or "total compensation", that would perhaps grudgingly convince 51% to vote yes for PBS? Just curious, the answer is likely different for everyone. One thing that is fairly clear is that when the mediator told ALPA to take their 43% and run, that pretty much set the cap on contract wins for the foreseeable future and put a price tag on PBS with a group that appeared to be as adamantly anti-PBS as we are, until suddenly they weren't. |
Originally Posted by Mozam
(Post 3228552)
The company has already said they are not willing to give anything for PBS. This was hashed out last contract.
|
Originally Posted by flensr
(Post 3228921)
I never said it did.
But if your W-2 says $300k now, a 43% pay raise would be fairly close to $100k/yr extra take home. You sidestepped the question with a nice little straw man counter-argument, so... is 43%, which would work out to 6 figure increase for a lot of people, enough to justify PBS like it was for Spirit? In the interest of full disclosure, that 43% was "total compensation". The pay scale didn't exactly go up 43%, they got 401k direct contribution up to 15% in addition to a few other minor gimme items that had value. It still works out to a 6 figure increase in total compensation for a lot of people no matter how you slice and dice it, and a goodly chunk of the 43% is tax sheltered, deferred, or exempt. No taxes on improved or cheaper medical benefits, no taxes on per diem rate increases because they're still below federal limits, deferred taxes on 401k direct contribution, etc. Again, 6 figures for a lot of people. Where's the threshold, pay scale or "total compensation", that would perhaps grudgingly convince 51% to vote yes for PBS? Just curious, the answer is likely different for everyone. One thing that is fairly clear is that when the mediator told ALPA to take their 43% and run, that pretty much set the cap on contract wins for the foreseeable future and put a price tag on PBS with a group that appeared to be as adamantly anti-PBS as we are, until suddenly they weren't. |
Originally Posted by WHACKMASTER
(Post 3229008)
I guess I wasn’t clear enough….HELL NO to PBS. Simple.
|
Originally Posted by flensr
(Post 3228921)
Where's the threshold, pay scale or "total compensation", that would perhaps grudgingly convince 51% to vote yes for PBS?.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:34 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands