Get. Over. It.

 

I miss the beaver...

 

The ignore feature on here can work wonders. What's that Catan, Dexim, Dumbfounded? Huh? What?

Blissful silence from the peaNUT gallery.

 

That beaver eats Taco Bell

 

These aren't my "thoughts" or even my math as you state. SlickMachine asked how "adding" employees to the pool doesn't dilute the payout. I was trying to give a simple explanation as to how it works without bogging down with extra info as the principle is the same. EVERYONE is in the pool for calculation purposes...doesn't mean they are entitled to a distribution. Even under the percentage you mention, that doesn't mean employees aren't included in the pool. It just shifts the money around to determine distribution and the left over money from the non-participating employees gets returned to the company.

(BTW, I mentioned the 40% thing in regards to L-CAL pilots as an example of how the OLD profit sharing calculations worked...but it was part of a much bigger explanation and calculation process under the old plan.)

I also asked on one of these threads if the 43.5% that has been mentioned is contractually in effect still for L-UAL pilots. The response I read was no it is not, unless I didn't understand the response correctly. If it is in effect, it is clear where you are coming from. If it isn't, then it would seem we are all part of the same 15% pool on equal footing with all other employees.

 

Yes, I do. Proud third generation union in my family. This is my second union. Went on strike at one of my previous jobs in another industry with another union and didn't cross the picket line then. I'd be proud to walk the line again with you and any of my other brothers and sisters at the new UAL if it ever comes to that. My strike fund has been ready for years.

 

Yes, extend the TPA for another period of time that the company doesn't desire to complete the JCBA. Signing an agreement with a termination date is an insult. If management was serious about getting contract, they wouldn't need TPA with a termination date. A termination date gives management leverage.

Management said they would terminate base protections but we could have furlough and ratio protections. Why would they let us have furlough and ratio
protections? They don't intend to furlough or materially change the fleet ratios. Therefore those offers for a time limited TPA are worthless.

 

Certainly you are not going to argue that there was even the slightest possibility that the sale of a few 767-200's would harm the CAL pilots to the tune of $8500/pilot? That is so void of rational thought that only the inexperienced would remotely accept that as a possibility.

Yes, J Pos received instructions from the CAL mec, and he rightfully attempted to gain profit sharing within the confines of the TPA. Your MEC was well within their right to seek benefits for the CAL pilots. You are not going to find many UAL pilots who don't think you should get $40 million. The issue arises when there is a belief the status quo was violated at the hand of UCH management vis a vis J Pos.


So it's okay to renew a TPA giving CAL pilots profit sharing. A TPA that currently does not include profit sharing for CAL pilots. But it is not okay to ask for a monetary gain for the UAL pilots. A financial benefit which is not currently included for the UAL pilots. It's called status quo.

Unrealistic demands presented to management? They are called opening requests. Negotiations usually ensue. Amazing how quick it was for UCH management to walk away, only to return to J Pos to craft a nifty little side deal.

Profit sharing was a negotiated benefit for the UAL to partially offset the pay losses we incurred in bankruptcy. Yes, you incurred a pay cut as well, but not like the haircut we took. You make how much more than us? Right.

 

FWIW, In the UAL Contract 2003 bankruptcy rewrite (current contract) "Success Sharing" was included under Section 3 Compensation language and reflected in two bonus programs.
1. Performance Incentive Program - Quarterly performance bonuses
2. Profit Sharing Program - Annual profit sharing bonuses

The Performance Incentive Program was terminated by Steve Wallach (MC before Wendy) by a Supplemental Agreement in April 2008, in exchange for a 1% pay increase on 2008 and 2009 hourly pay rates. As part of the language in that Agreement, the Profit Sharing Program remains in full force and in effect.

There is some confusion as the Supplemental Agreement incorrectly references Section 3-L (Paid Absences) rather than 3-M (Success Sharing) which pertains to profit sharing. However, the language clearly reflected the intent of the Agreement as a modifications of the Success Sharing Agreement. Not sure if that discrepancy was ever addressed.

Of course when dealing with a contract that's past its amendable date one can speculate on sections which are no longer applicable but in the absence of sunset clauses the language remain in force until a new contract is signed. So yes 43.5% remains L-UAL's pilots contractually negotiated claim of the total distribution in the Profit Sharing Program.

 

The TPA didn't terminate as a whole, only certain provisions. What was the leverage to extend all portions of the TPA indefinitely?

This is all hearsay as neither one of us was there, but it sounds like we agree here. The offer made to us jointly was to extend the expiring provisions of the TPA minus base protections, which affected both sides roughly equally (tough to know exactly). Your MEC decided that wasn't good enough and wanted more. We played along for a while, until there obviously wasn't going to be movement. Our MEC then used a grievance to get the CAL pilots included in CY2011 profit sharing, which wouldn't have been possible after December 31st. Our MECs are currently jointly working on provisions in the TPA.

In my eyes, your MEC bravely (yes, that's sarcasm) was willing to leverage the CAL pilots chance for profit sharing in order to make a political stand for something they knew they weren't going to get. I didn't expect profit sharing, but the more I heard from those in a position to know about what happened behind the scenes, the more I'm glad we got it.

Our MECs still have primary responsibility to represent our respective pilot groups. Sometimes the goals and direction are exactly the same. In some areas they'll be different, with the SLI being the prime example.