Profit Sharing
02-08-2012, 09:48 PM
#33
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,071
02-09-2012, 05:35 AM
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: 737 CAPT
Posts: 1,900
Not directed at you, APC225.
The current situation is simple and not as complicated as some would make it. When our side couldn't come to an agreement with the UAL side regarding PS, our side used an outstanding CAL contractual grievance to settle the issue. PS was given to us in exchange for settling the the grievance filed under our contract.
Along the lines of the communication from the LAX council, the low UAL pay rates were concessionary pay rates that UAL pilots were meant to live under day after day, month after month, and year after year until a new contract was in place. Hence by their own logic, they should not have been asking for pay increases in the T&PA extension talks. That would be hypocritical after all.
UAL LAX base blastmail
December 31, 2011
United Pilots of Los Angeles:
By now you've probably seen or heard about the company entering into a deal with the CAL MEC to give the CAL pilots profit sharing for 2011. This has generated a significant amount of email and message traffic to your local officers, so Bill asked me to take a moment to provide you with some information since John and I were at the last Special MEC Meeting while Bill recuperates from his shoulder surgery.
As I said in an earlier update, the current situation is not complicated but some folks have tried very hard to make it that way and that is unfortunate. The simple fact of the matter regarding profit sharing is that the CAL pilots did not have it because they had earlier given it away as a concession. Conversely, the United pilots had it because we received it in exchange for concessions given. In other words, our profit sharing has been bought and paid for with concessions that we continue to suffer under, month by month, year by year. The CAL pilot profit sharing was a concession that was meant for them to continue to go without, month by month, year by year, until they got a new contract and rectified that situation. Please remember that part: A NEW CONTRACT. That is where all focus should be and where all aims should lead.
With that in mind, back up just over a year and in exchange for agreeing to play nice with the company regarding the merger, the United MEC and the Continental MEC entered into a Transition and Process Agreement in the name of ALL of the pilots in which we all got a few items of value to us, some specifically aimed at one pilot group or the other, and some of which lasted for only one year and/or could be canceled by the company after 18 months. The only explanation for that is a lack of leverage – we certainly would have made them permanent if we could have.
Now those items all had very real value. The CAL profit sharing is probably somewhere north of $40 million and what price shall we put on the domicile protections etc.? Now that the intervening 1 ½ years are up, the CAL and UAL pilots obviously still want those things but we also, more importantly, want a new JCBA. With that in mind, the UAL MEC Leadership hatched a plan that they then discussed with CAL Master Chairman Jay Pierce in which we might use the fact that the company dearly wanted to find a way to include the CAL pilots in that company's profit sharing plan as part of a leverage and enticement package to not only extend the T&PA in its' entirety, but also to entice and incentivize UAL management to swiftly conclude a JCBA. This is exactly where our focus SHOULD be!
December 31, 2011
United Pilots of Los Angeles:
By now you've probably seen or heard about the company entering into a deal with the CAL MEC to give the CAL pilots profit sharing for 2011. This has generated a significant amount of email and message traffic to your local officers, so Bill asked me to take a moment to provide you with some information since John and I were at the last Special MEC Meeting while Bill recuperates from his shoulder surgery.
As I said in an earlier update, the current situation is not complicated but some folks have tried very hard to make it that way and that is unfortunate. The simple fact of the matter regarding profit sharing is that the CAL pilots did not have it because they had earlier given it away as a concession. Conversely, the United pilots had it because we received it in exchange for concessions given. In other words, our profit sharing has been bought and paid for with concessions that we continue to suffer under, month by month, year by year. The CAL pilot profit sharing was a concession that was meant for them to continue to go without, month by month, year by year, until they got a new contract and rectified that situation. Please remember that part: A NEW CONTRACT. That is where all focus should be and where all aims should lead.
With that in mind, back up just over a year and in exchange for agreeing to play nice with the company regarding the merger, the United MEC and the Continental MEC entered into a Transition and Process Agreement in the name of ALL of the pilots in which we all got a few items of value to us, some specifically aimed at one pilot group or the other, and some of which lasted for only one year and/or could be canceled by the company after 18 months. The only explanation for that is a lack of leverage – we certainly would have made them permanent if we could have.
Now those items all had very real value. The CAL profit sharing is probably somewhere north of $40 million and what price shall we put on the domicile protections etc.? Now that the intervening 1 ½ years are up, the CAL and UAL pilots obviously still want those things but we also, more importantly, want a new JCBA. With that in mind, the UAL MEC Leadership hatched a plan that they then discussed with CAL Master Chairman Jay Pierce in which we might use the fact that the company dearly wanted to find a way to include the CAL pilots in that company's profit sharing plan as part of a leverage and enticement package to not only extend the T&PA in its' entirety, but also to entice and incentivize UAL management to swiftly conclude a JCBA. This is exactly where our focus SHOULD be!
Along the lines of the communication from the LAX council, the low UAL pay rates were concessionary pay rates that UAL pilots were meant to live under day after day, month after month, and year after year until a new contract was in place. Hence by their own logic, they should not have been asking for pay increases in the T&PA extension talks. That would be hypocritical after all.
02-09-2012, 05:37 AM
#35
Banned
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Position: IAH 737 CA
Posts: 690
I remember seeing something on this board about the CAL pilots getting 45 million for profit sharing. I looked for the post, but could not find it. It said the average CAL pilot would get 10,000 in profit sharing.
I'm UAL and last year I got a little over 9,000. This year I'm getting about 6,500. That's a big hit considering I had about the same gross pay both years. I'll check the other board to see if the infomation is there.
I'm UAL and last year I got a little over 9,000. This year I'm getting about 6,500. That's a big hit considering I had about the same gross pay both years. I'll check the other board to see if the infomation is there.
02-09-2012, 10:30 AM
#36
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,071
Not directed at you, APC225.
The current situation is simple and not as complicated as some would make it. When our side couldn't come to an agreement with the UAL side regarding PS, our side used an outstanding CAL contractual grievance to settle the issue. PS was given to us in exchange for settling the the grievance filed under our contract.
Along the lines of the communication from the LAX council, the low UAL pay rates were concessionary pay rates that UAL pilots were meant to live under day after day, month after month, and year after year until a new contract was in place. Hence by their own logic, they should not have been asking for pay increases in the T&PA extension talks. That would be hypocritical after all.
The current situation is simple and not as complicated as some would make it. When our side couldn't come to an agreement with the UAL side regarding PS, our side used an outstanding CAL contractual grievance to settle the issue. PS was given to us in exchange for settling the the grievance filed under our contract.
Along the lines of the communication from the LAX council, the low UAL pay rates were concessionary pay rates that UAL pilots were meant to live under day after day, month after month, and year after year until a new contract was in place. Hence by their own logic, they should not have been asking for pay increases in the T&PA extension talks. That would be hypocritical after all.
The $40 million the CAL pilots received is not profit sharing. Profit sharing would indicate the CAL pilots are receiving a % of the profits as a % of your 2011 compensation. You guys call it a grievance settlement. I would brand it as a combination management PR stunt and divisive employee wedge. Which one is bearing fruit?
What we should have asked for was a commensurate compensation of $40 million to maintain the status quo. Hey, I've got a fine pencil the L-UAL pilots can sell UCH for $40 million.
02-09-2012, 03:02 PM
#37
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,083
It all depends what side of the fence you're looking through.
02-10-2012, 09:50 AM
#40
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: 737 CA
Posts: 2,750
Can't be your W2 wages. Your 2011 W2 wages INCLUDES your 2010 profit sharing. You don't earn profit sharing on profit sharing.
My total W2 is completely different than my regular earnings by about $5,000 more...which includes 2010 profit sharing, on-time bonuses, health care credits, etc. The company doesn't pay profit sharing on those.
The company made more profit combined last year. As a result the profit sharing pool is bigger. It's a strict flat amount of 15% pre-tax profits that go into the pool. As was mentioned before, PS is calculated for each employee as if they were in the pool and only the PS for those really in the pool are distributed. All other money is returned to the company coffers.
To be honest, I find the distribution question interesting. For most of last year, as was repeatedly stated, we were operating as two separate companies, until SOC which occurred in November. January 1st of 2012 is the first quarter the company will report combined DOT metrics as United (as they have said) and report all financial results as a combined United with no pro-rata information. So that begs the question, why aren't they considering the profit sharing as being divided up separately? I am honestly curious.
It would seem if there is a United pilot entitlement to 43.5% of the profit sharing pool contractually and we are still operating separately, then the pool would be divided into L-UAL and L-CAL and the pilots would get the bigger share of the L-UAL side.
there is not a 43.5% entitlement. that was the original deal in the 2003 contract, but it was later changed.
I also have to ask are you certain there is no language in the L-UAL contract regarding profit sharing that says it must always stay at this 43.5% mentioned? I ask because L-CAL profit sharing used to be divided up based on two metrics:
43.5% is GONE, not a player
1. 50% of the pool was distributed based on percentage share of payroll (in other words everyone was equal in this pool because this amount of the PS pool was just divided up based on how much you made)
2. The other 50% of the pool was distributed based on the percentage of each work groups give backs during the concessions of 2005. If the pilots gave back 40% of all the concessions, the pilots got 40% of this half of the pool.
However, this distribution method was to be used so long as the company continued to use the same profit sharing plan. The plan was eventually changed by the company for 2010 and on to be a flat 15% of pre-tax profits going into the pool as opposed to the graduated percentage rates of profits it was using. As a result, the payout method changed for all employees.
My total W2 is completely different than my regular earnings by about $5,000 more...which includes 2010 profit sharing, on-time bonuses, health care credits, etc. The company doesn't pay profit sharing on those.
The company made more profit combined last year. As a result the profit sharing pool is bigger. It's a strict flat amount of 15% pre-tax profits that go into the pool. As was mentioned before, PS is calculated for each employee as if they were in the pool and only the PS for those really in the pool are distributed. All other money is returned to the company coffers.
To be honest, I find the distribution question interesting. For most of last year, as was repeatedly stated, we were operating as two separate companies, until SOC which occurred in November. January 1st of 2012 is the first quarter the company will report combined DOT metrics as United (as they have said) and report all financial results as a combined United with no pro-rata information. So that begs the question, why aren't they considering the profit sharing as being divided up separately? I am honestly curious.
It would seem if there is a United pilot entitlement to 43.5% of the profit sharing pool contractually and we are still operating separately, then the pool would be divided into L-UAL and L-CAL and the pilots would get the bigger share of the L-UAL side.
there is not a 43.5% entitlement. that was the original deal in the 2003 contract, but it was later changed.
I also have to ask are you certain there is no language in the L-UAL contract regarding profit sharing that says it must always stay at this 43.5% mentioned? I ask because L-CAL profit sharing used to be divided up based on two metrics:
43.5% is GONE, not a player
1. 50% of the pool was distributed based on percentage share of payroll (in other words everyone was equal in this pool because this amount of the PS pool was just divided up based on how much you made)
2. The other 50% of the pool was distributed based on the percentage of each work groups give backs during the concessions of 2005. If the pilots gave back 40% of all the concessions, the pilots got 40% of this half of the pool.
However, this distribution method was to be used so long as the company continued to use the same profit sharing plan. The plan was eventually changed by the company for 2010 and on to be a flat 15% of pre-tax profits going into the pool as opposed to the graduated percentage rates of profits it was using. As a result, the payout method changed for all employees.
Sled
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
