Originally Posted by krudawg (Post 1281938)

After reading all the various ways of dividing the retro or Signing Bonus, as the company prefers to call it, I have drawn the following conclusions:
Each individual pilot is trying to carve out a bigger slice than they may be entitled to because of a desire to "get mine and screw anyone else". I get that-greed is a motivator that separates Capitalists from Communists. I don't want any less "than my fair share" but I am not willing to argue endlessly about what is "fair" - nobody will convince someone else to take less. We are all providing fodder to the UA management team. So let's take a page out of Rick Dubinsky's book and "choke the goose to lay more golden eggs" Gentlemen; we must throw this AIP back at the company and tell them NO! I want UAL to choke on the retro pay so next time they will think twice about dragging on negotiations and wearing down the pilot group.

Originally Posted by krudawg (Post 1281938)

I get that-greed is a motivator that separates Capitalists from Communists.

Originally Posted by SOTeric (Post 1281945)

Good call.

It also gives us the opportunity to shelve than utterly stupid pay banding.

Originally Posted by Shrek (Post 1281952)

Exactly............banding is ridiculous. We need to got back to decision 83.

Originally Posted by APC225 (Post 1281949)

Maybe greed is just as powerful in Communism, it's just focused on the very few at the top who are monumentally greedy in convincing (or forcing) everyone else to be selfless for just those few.

Originally Posted by krudawg (Post 1281938)

I want UAL to choke on the retro pay so next time they will think twice about dragging on negotiations and wearing down the pilot group.

Originally Posted by JoePatroni (Post 1282048)

The simple reason retro pay exists in the first place, why are we trying to reinvent the wheel?

Originally Posted by SpecialTracking (Post 1282072)

To benefit one group at the expense of another.

Originally Posted by SpecialTracking (Post 1282072)

To benefit one group at the expense of another.