Rock

I agreed that if we turn this TA down we need to unemotionally change our negotiating line up. But a "mandate for more" has no real value. If 100% of our pilots decide we want to fly in purple kilts, the company has no obligation to make it happen. Similarly, if 100% of our pilots say "we want more" our new team of negotiators have nothing new to work with unless we give the mandate some teeth. What are the teeth?

Rock

I'm pretty sure none of us have any idea what our hand is. And I'll just make my previous offer a standing offer...I will trade employee numbers with anyone who wants to bet I am now or ever have held a management or ALPA position. Look me up, and if I have, you own my lump sum bonus. If you're wrong, I get yours.

hellsbells

Consider a 60 year old pilot that has 25 years of service and a high 5 of $260k. His A Plan retirement would be $130k/yr. Every year this pilot works past age 60, the company saves $130k in not having to pay his retirement and, if the pilot works until 65, the company would save $650,000 and probably more because of the Time Value of Money (plus he probably won't live as long but I won't go there).
Life expectancy in the US is around 78 so the pilot retiring at 65 would expect 13 years worth of payments from his A Plan. If you divide $650,000 by 13 you get $50k. Add the $50k to the max benefit now of $130k and you get $180k which is really the break even point for the company of a pilot working to age 65 vs. retiring at age 60. To get to a $180k/yr you would need a high 5 average of $360k which is around what the cap should be. Even if you look at an avg. retirement age of 62.5, the break even point for the company would be a high 5 cap of $310k.
The bottom line is the increase in the retirement age was a windfall to the company and would more than enough, in and of itself, pay to fix the A Plan.

CloudSailor

No, it might not be a win, but in your metaphorical example, he didn't sell the house for a loss, with the first lowball offer!

What person selling a home takes the first lowball offer in a seller's market???

fdx727pilot

Tony, I have read through Section 28 several times. Is there anything in the TA to keep us from retiring in early November, as is currently the fashion? I know you give up the bonus, but you can still get buy back on 1 or 2 years of vacation (if your vacation is in Nov or Dec.). Based on the current state of my DSA and FAE amounts, this strategy in Oct-Nov timeframe of 2017 will result in a slight loss of immediate cash payout (bonus plus,) but result in a higher FAE and a higher long-term payout.

Am I missing something?

iarapilot

Not to be a wise guy, but do you really not get it? With your first sentence, you can play devils advocate, OK.

You say the NC has told the Company what we are worth. OK again.

The bottom line is that we the pilots havent told the Company, directly, what we are worth. That is the point. With your line of reasoning, if the NC says OK, why do we even need a vote?

FDXLAG

It has been asked and answer, nothing has changed as far as selling back vacation in you last year.

Rock

The house has been on the market for four years. And the first offer (with our only buyer unless you're willing to quit and find a company that is willing to give you a better deal) is actually better in most respects than the contract you have been living under. It isn't as good as you were hoping for, so you could reject it and hope for something better. But the buyer isn't changing, so you better give him a damn good reason to offer more than what he's already offered.

pipe

Uncle. I give up. You vote yes, I'll vote no. Canceled out. At least I'll know my vote went to a good cause.

Pipe

Rock

I don't take your comments the wrong way. But maybe you don't really get it either. The company doesn't care what you think you are worth. Why not just tell the company we are worth a million dollars a year? Each. I mean, if our salery is based on what we think we are worth, why not shoot for the moon?
And it wasn't just the NC. It was a majority of the elected body of the MEC. A sigificant majority. I'm not trying to be a jerk here, but remember that our republic works the same way. "Works" being relative. Doesn't mean I agree with what comes out of Washington...but apparently most of the idiots I live with like the representatives we have because the same names seem to make decisions for me year after year. I don't recall the last election I actually voted "for" something.