TeddyKGB

Talk about someone full of sour grapes. Move on Bro.

Denny Crane

We know about the dental and vision. Essentially what they are saying is once you reach the 80/20 coinsurance, then you can use it. They are talking about a very specific an only time you can use it for medical. But yes, you are right.

Okay, my bad. But you cannot use it to make copays or any portion of the deductible which is $2600 or more for next year. I didn't think it could be used with any medical expenses. Good luck to anyone that can accurately figure that into what they want to put into an LPFSA!

Denny

gloopy

There's not going to be a "loss of DCI". A slow, controlled burn maybe, but there is no shortage of lift hardware available if they really want DL pilots to be the ones doing it, and it doesn't have to be any of the paper revolution vaporware jets.

CheapTrick

PD invents a conspiracy and you just jump in with both feet? Every contract, every time, every thing is on the table. Stop pulling up your bloomers and screaming.

Rogue24

What is on the table is what both sides put in their openers. In almost every case that touches every section of the contract.

On Profit Sharing. Yes, they may want to monetize some of it. Everyone says no, but what if D-ALPA can get 2-3 dollars for every one traded?

Lets say that another "black swan" event happens and profit sharing dries up, but D-ALPA didn't touch it, and you took a 10-15% pay cut year-over-year? What would you say then?

Making blanket statements might not put the most money in your pocket. Saying no to a 1:1 trade is more astute, and one that I agree with. We need a significant return on that modification if we do it. Adding a premium to the modification of 2X is probably where most pilots will at least listen to the proposal and not dismiss it out of hand

DeadHead

Personally, any reduction in profit sharing is a no-go for me.
The problem with the "monetizing profit sharing" approach is that DALPA doesn't provide that dataset to the pilot group to consider during ratification. I've been curious as to what our actual pay raise percentages came out to during C2012 in retrospect considering the reduction from 15% to 10% of the first threshold.

Profits sharing was negotiated at a time when the company was hurting and needed to incentivize the employee group/pilots to build the company back towards success/profitability. Negotiating down that profit sharing when the company is making money seems to defeat the purpose for which we negotiated it in the first place.

When I filled out my contract survey, I made it poignantly clear that any attempt to "move money around" in attempt to inflate a percentage and mislead data is an instant NO vote from me. I'm willing to consider anything the negotiating committee presents to me as long as we, the pilot group, are presented with ALL the data minus the BS. If we are talking about a reduction in profit sharing, and that's a big if, we absolutely should demand a monetized analysis in contrast to pay rate increases under the assumption we maximize profit sharing thresholds each year.

If history is an indicator of the future, when hard times hit the company absolutely everything is on the table....pay, work rules, QOL, retirement, benefits, profit sharing.....all of it is ripe for picking in the eyes of corporate salvation.

We are in a holding pattern for now, and I try not to get worked up on rumor and innuendo.

Justdoinmyjob

The way to do it is a two step process. First negotiate the pay rates, and then negotiate the premium % above the new rates for giving up PS.

So, 4-8-3-3 or whatever pay and then at a minimum 20% above that for the PS.

scambo1

This profit sharing discussion is rapidly devolving into the new hire age vs SSAN discussion.
Lately I have used the profit sharing to hit my 401k out of pocket max. I like that. So, for me, any talk on reducing profit sharing has to make up for that. Instantly.

I've treated the overage as income and continued to do my IRA catch-up contributions (over fitty).

Pay rate wise, I am negotiable. Profit sharing wise, I'm not.

In this environment, I would expect to see an easy 20-25% contract value bump in the first year (that's not necessarily pay rates alone). I include profit sharing in that baseline current value.

DAWGS

Any Black Swan event and it's all on the table again as it was before. PS is payback or a dividend from all our sacrifices for previous years of low pay and saving our company.

I have no doubt that the company and union will bring us a TA with PS reduced. It's too easy for the union to call it __% raise over __years and the company will save money...win win. Negotiating Capital that is easily sacrificed. Same as C2012. My vote will be the same also.

I actually like all of us sharing in the success of the company. I truly believe it creates more of a team atmosphere and guys go above and beyond much more than before it was an incentive.

hammer189

A "Black Swan" event may cause the company to come to us for pay cuts. If we have profit sharing this built in shock absorber (managements term I believe) would already be in place. I use profit sharing to fill up my 401K also. Any monitizing profit sharing is a "No" from me.