Wrong, they would only have to report $8 billion over the life of the agreement, the compounding only effects the first two years because the net total of the mid term wage adjustment isn't affected by the 4% and will no doubt be well in excess of the 4%.NYer said:You're smarter than that, at least in theory. We received a raise 4.3% raise from a company that wasn't really ours yet. We were able to bet a raise that is compounded yearly, that compounds in our OT, that compounds on our 401K over a potential of a profit sharing plan that would have to rport about $4B in profits every single year in order to receive an equivalent value of the raise. The adjustment in wages carries as an average which would lower our potential raise since we would have started lower than where we are.... but that's a different topic.
Then we have this.... knowing that we have many people on here that believe the TWU is weak then it would stand to reason that those same people would be feeling better knowing we received a known value with the raise as opposed to a moving target where the value is predicated on a potential payout that our counterparts gave up during the 2008 negotiations in order to add to their pension formula. So, in Joint talks it seems abundantly clear that a profit sharing plan had a limited and expiring shelf life.
Clear to whom? Donnelly? The guy who overstated out cost out by $250 million? Who costed out sick time as all days used and covered with Overtime, an assumption they did not use when they took the sick time away? A guy who came up with a plan that gave the company two bites of the apple by deducting the cut in pay from the value of other concessions requiring us to give up far more in concessions in 2003? The guy who left the TWU shortly after Little and Videtich left and went directly into SWA management?
Pre-merger AA lawyers let it out in court that their stand alone plan would leave them earning $2.8 billion a year. IIRC US was projecting synergies of $2 billion with the merger, so even if the US operations broke even that leaves a potential of $4.8 billion per year in profits. Makes giving up profit sharing over the life of the agreement for a two year 4.3% advance of the mid term wage adjustment look even worse.
The whole selling point of the merger was that it would leave us with a better deal than the stand alone AA was offering, well as of now it doesn't appear that we will have gained anything other than a two year advance of a portion of the mid term wage adjustment in exchange for possibly 6 to 10 (or more) years of profit sharing.