Lenticularis

I’m thinking we see an AIP by late tomorrow night. Kirby wants this done before they post the quarterly profits. Just my guess

FangsF15

Good Grief, Sailing. If DL “abandoned retro”, why did I get a check for $60 grand? It wasn’t DOS percent all the way back (aka “full” retro), but it absolutely was retro.

As others have explained too, if the NC needs the MEC to ‘refine’ NC direction in order to reach an AIP, then the MEC has a role and vote on an AIP.

Go get ‘em UA. We all hope y’all knock it out of the park.

Whiskeyjet1

As opposed to grounding into a double play like last time! We can hope.

sailingfun

If you assumed very modest pay raises based on passed contracts like 8,4,4 we got about 30 cents on the dollar. If you use the unions opening numbers about 10 cents on the dollar. Do you not remember hundreds of posts that we would never, ever, ever, never sign a contract without 100% full retro! When I posted that if the contract was more than a year late we would never see full retro it was reiterated that we would never, ever, ever, never sign a contract without full retro! Hell we even wrote it into the union bylaws.
What we accepted was a small percentage of what was due in the form of a signing bonus without any compounding on future rates.
The 8,4,4 number which the forums also said was totally unacceptable would have paid you 8% year one, 12.3% year two and almost 17% year 3. Using what I felt was reasonable and posted at 12, 4, 4, which again the forum said was a complete surrender you would have received 12%, 16.5%, 21%.
On top of all that we got nothing into the DC plan as retro should have paid so you lost 16% on your non retro retro check.
Let’s not spin what we got as anything beyond what it was. A one time signing bonus.

FangsF15

We’ve argued this on our own forum, I’m not going to debate that here except to say I disagree strongly with your conclusion.

Delta got Retro. AA got retro (shockingly a carbon copy of ours). Not “Full” retro, but it was retroactive pay based on individual earnings. To say we abandoned retro is untrue and disingenuous.

DashTrash

Unfortunately some here believe unless you get “full retro” you’ve abandoned retro. My personal opinion is that we shouldn’t get retro for the two years that the tax payers were paying our salaries. I believe it’s myopic and could have serious consequences regarding PR.

hummingbear

Only if the taxpayers were paying our retro, which they wouldn’t be. Unless you’re running a right-wing super PAC, corporate money flowing back to rank & file labor probably doesn’t offend you. In fact, what angers most people is the opposite- corporations taking big COVID era subsidies & pocketing the excess.

Chowdah

personally, I think if you do not get a 401(k) contribution, commensurate with your normal pay, then it is not retro. That doesn’t make me an automatic YES or NO about, but I certainly think it moves it into the realm of a signing bonus, rather than ”retro,” if pay parts of your normal pay are excluded.

Jefferson

​​​​​​There have been 18 earnings calls since the contract became amendable. That is not a motivator.

DashTrash

You are correct, but Kirby hasn’t had this much controversy regarding his leadership before…