Last Year > This Week
08-12-2016, 08:03 AM
#11
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: A330 First Officer
Posts: 1,465
Rumor or source? 18/5/5 sounds great unless of course you are funding it on the backside with PS or something else. So basically those numbers mean nothing without the entire section 3 to look at.
08-12-2016, 08:12 AM
#12
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2015
Position: Power top
Posts: 2,960
08-12-2016, 08:21 AM
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
No need to laugh. Let's just find out. Are we negotiating in public, or aren't we? No fair just releasing the AIP's and company opener, and not show the rest. Do we deserve to know what the reps are debating over, or don't we?
08-12-2016, 08:33 AM
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2015
Position: stake holder ir.delta.com
Posts: 10,456
"I don't believe we've made that public yet." when the old MEC chair was asked a direct question about the JV grievance settlement prior to the TA1 vote. Stalling much? Where's the A321 Delta dot? Those arbitrators must be doing a great job, they are deciding the half way point between two numbers right? To what decimal place? I have a calculator they could borrow.
08-12-2016, 08:52 AM
#16
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: 757 Left
Posts: 1,308
Good point. Profit sharing is our only protection while the company invests our profits in everything under the sun. We can't let the camel's nose anywhere near that tent.
08-12-2016, 09:15 AM
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2009
Position: Gold-Braided Lesser French Fort Commander
Posts: 137
08-12-2016, 09:59 AM
#18
The Brown Dot +1
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
08-12-2016, 10:24 AM
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: 767A (Ret)
Posts: 6,248
08-12-2016, 10:27 AM
#20
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
I'll agree with H50 as well. It might work in reverse when GOL/Trainer/VA (and whatever else) lose money, but I see your point. It's galling to think that the company invests money we help them earn, into other entities, and we might not benefit.
I don't have qualms about monetizing the low end of PS, but not having upside protection is a non-starter. In theory, you could have the best of both worlds by monetizing the low end, and keeping the upper-end, but we'd be arguing for years about what's a raise, and what isn't. At this juncture, if you're looking for consensus so we can move out of our own way, I think PS must be mostly intact.
I don't have qualms about monetizing the low end of PS, but not having upside protection is a non-starter. In theory, you could have the best of both worlds by monetizing the low end, and keeping the upper-end, but we'd be arguing for years about what's a raise, and what isn't. At this juncture, if you're looking for consensus so we can move out of our own way, I think PS must be mostly intact.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
