Herkflyr

I'm at 64 hours for the month! But...I did get to enjoy my kid's baseball tournament, camping last weekend, and more.

I'm a fan of the occasional GS as well, but vowed not to get consumed by them.

scambo1

I haven't missed a swim meet, basketball game, parent teacher conference, camp out, Cub Scout hike, etc. but I guess I'm a crappy dad because I work overtime when I can. This is, after all, my job.

Scoop

There is no "right way" to do it. Everyone's situation is different, that is one of the benefits of this job.

Some guys want and work for max $$$$$$ - and it works for them.

Some work for max time off - and it works for them.

Many work for a combination of max $$$$$ with the minimum amount of "extra work."

Who cares - to each his own.

Where I have to draw the line is at 12,000 + dudes/dudetts trying to fly 90 hours hard time a month.

Scoop

Herkflyr

Excellent points all. I have had 100+ hour months, and other months at far less than that. Everyone has a different life and priorities, and even that ebbs and flows over the years.

Carl Spackler

I agree, but that's not what we were talking about. We were talking about a union that flights for us as a contract bargaining agent. Tsquare does not want to fight management. Period. My question was why then do we need a union? You seem to be stating that it's for your examples above. Maybe that's enough for some.

Carl

Jughead135

I've been thinking about this as I try to determine how best to manage my retirement plan--and, I have to say, on further reflection: you're doing it wrong.

Any amount you contribute to the DPSP that "forces" some amount of the company contribution to come to you directly is counter-productive. Your total income stays the same; your total added to your DPSP likewise stays the same; but your taxable income for the year increases dollar-for-dollar for any amount of the company contribution coming in your paycheck instead of into the DPSP account, as follows:

• Your 401(k) elective deferrals are pre-tax, i.e., reduce your taxable income dollar-for-dollar. Assume for this discussion that the max is reached ($17.5K for 2014, $18K for 2015), but so long as the same dollar amount is contributed in either scenario, the result is the same.
• Any "401(a)" contributions you make are post-tax (come from taxable income).
• Any company contributions to the DPSP are pre-tax (do not add to your taxable income).
• Any company contributions directly to you are taxable income.
• None of these affect your total income; the question is how much is your taxable income.
• The "instead of" bolded up there refers to those earning enough that the 15% company contribution results in at least the difference between the max limit & the elective deferral limit ($52K - 17.5K = $34.5, which is 15% of $230K [2014 numbers]); in this case, the 15% company contribution money coming directly to you still adds to your taxable income, but you've already maxed out the pre-tax account (i.e., good problem to have!).

Assuming the "ideal goal" is to max the elective deferral, max your total DPSP contribution, and minimize taxable income: one should hit the max elective deferral AND contribute enough to the 401(a) to reach the limit ($52K for 2014, $53K for 2015), WITHOUT contributing "too much" and forcing the company match to come in the paycheck. In practice, that may be tough to calculate, since our pay can vary from month to month and the company contribution is percentage-based....

For those fortunate to reliably make enough that the company match alone will hit the limit, this is a non-issue. The rest of us need to watch it more closely. Either way, contributions to the extent that it precludes the company match from going into the DPSP is counter-productive, since it increases your taxable income without any increase to your actual total income nor to your total account contribution.

...or, am I missing something?? Perhaps you're in the category of having reached the limit without any after-tax contributions??

[EDIT: Which, perhaps, is what you meant here:
Sorry if I misunderstood what you meant by "filled" re the taxable income issue; however, your post is what prompted me to think about it, and I've heard/read of others "increasing" their pay via this method.]






(all number ignore "catch-up" contributions for age 50+; since those don't count against the limits, simply add them to the totals if appropriate)

tsquare

I drank wayyyyy too much last night.

Purple Drank

Outing participants? Looks like someone's ready for a ban.

DAL 88 Driver

Originally Posted by Rather B Fishin
Our union does fight for us. Every pilot that gets reimbursed for an incorrect assignment is a win. Every pilot that doesn't get disciplined for an indiscretion is a win. Every pilot who goes through a training review board/probationary pilot review board and then goes on to successfully meet the criteria is a win. Every time the company pays out for a PWA violation w/o having to go to arbitration is a win. There are countless of unseen victories/fights each and every day.

Good post, Carl. I guess maybe that's what it comes down to with the majority of us. I learned somewhere back around 2nd grade that there are times you just have to fight for yourself or you will continue to be bullied. Maybe the majority of this pilot group doesn't consider being compensated today at a level roughly comparable to the way we were compensated after taking a draconian pay cut in an extreme crisis as being bullied. Maybe the majority have accepted this "new reality"/standard for airline pilot compensation.

The last thing in the world I want to do is fight with our management. I want Delta Air Lines to be the most successful airline/company on the planet. And that is best accomplished by EVERYONE working together as a team to provide the very best product possible to our valued customers. But if you accept the premise that we are in fact being "bullied" by being compensated at a bankruptcy level when our industry has been restructured in such a positive way and our company is making such amazing profits, then it's quite possibly going to take a little standing up for ourselves to rectify that. I guess the majority, while many are not happy with the situation, are not willing to stand up and fight if necessary. How can our management respect us when we don't even demonstrate that we respect ourselves?

I'm clearly in the minority here, so I think I'll be joining tsquare in leaving this place (APC). If you guys decide at some point in the future to stand up for our profession, then you'll have my support (and I'll consider putting that ALPA pin back on). Otherwise, I'll continue voting no to any agreement that doesn't substantially restore our pay and I'll continue loving my job and giving it 110% just like I always do. That's about all I can do... I can't force anyone else to stand up for themselves. There's way more to life than money so I'm happy either way.

NWA320pilot

At least your original post called it like you felt. Using someone's name as a form of intimidation is childish..........