Munoz' Only Chance
10-16-2015, 08:48 AM
#31
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Posts: 439
Originally Posted by untied
That's the same line of B.S. that the LCAL side gave when they were given profit sharing without negotiating it.
We grieved it and won…so no, it's not "pre diluted".
And no, they should not get profit sharing if it's not in their contract.
We can't just have special groups given more than what they negotiated while leaving out the other "co-workers".
We grieved it and won…so no, it's not "pre diluted".
And no, they should not get profit sharing if it's not in their contract.
We can't just have special groups given more than what they negotiated while leaving out the other "co-workers".
10-16-2015, 10:05 AM
#35
UCH Pilot
Joined APC: Oct 2014
Position: 787
Posts: 776
Originally Posted by untied
That's the same line of B.S. that the LCAL side gave when they were given profit sharing without negotiating it.
We grieved it and won…so no, it's not "pre diluted".
And no, they should not get profit sharing if it's not in their contract.
We can't just have special groups given more than what they negotiated while leaving out the other "co-workers".
We grieved it and won…so no, it's not "pre diluted".
And no, they should not get profit sharing if it's not in their contract.
We can't just have special groups given more than what they negotiated while leaving out the other "co-workers".
10-16-2015, 10:14 AM
#36
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,083
Originally Posted by svergin
Why shouldn't LCAL pilots have been given profit sharing? We participated in the same company helping make that profit.
10-16-2015, 10:24 AM
#37
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: 787
Posts: 3,191
Originally Posted by CousinEddie
Recognizing the contribution that a group made to the company. Good concept. I agree. Yet when it comes to the furloughees and their years of longevity with the company and contribution they made, you think that should have been completely ignored.
10-16-2015, 11:18 AM
#38
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2009
Position: The GF of FUPM
Posts: 3,073
Originally Posted by svergin
Why shouldn't LCAL pilots have been given profit sharing? We participated in the same company helping make that profit.
What did the arbitrator say about it? Didn't this already get beat to death?
Last edited by oldmako; 10-16-2015 at 11:38 AM.
10-16-2015, 11:29 AM
#39
UCH Pilot
Joined APC: Oct 2014
Position: 787
Posts: 776
Originally Posted by CousinEddie
Recognizing the contribution that a group made to the company. Good concept. I agree. Yet when it comes to the furloughees and their years of longevity with the company and contribution they made, you think that should have been completely ignored.
10-16-2015, 11:37 AM
#40
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: 787
Posts: 3,191
Originally Posted by svergin
I don't exactly know how to recognize longevity and what that's really worth. It looked like profit sharing was paid out based on pay received, so the 777 CA got more than a 737 FO, but did they really contribute more? Really? Also two pilots with the exact same longevity may be paid differently based on their BES and how much add pay they fly, so its not strictly longevity that matters to the company or the union.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
