Jetblue To Reconsider E190 Order

[CaptianBoomer]

Jetz:

JB still contributes to my 401K with a match.....they just aren't making a profit sharing deposit......so it is not a paycut as pay can be spent.

No spin here.

Next!

Boomer

 

[767jetz]

Jetz:

JB still contributes to my 401K with a match.....they just aren't making a profit sharing deposit......so it is not a paycut as pay can be spent.

No spin here.

Next!

Boomer

So I guess you don't plan on spending your 401K when you retire, huh? Plan on donating it to charity??

Of course contribtions to your retirement are considered pay. You can be sure the comapny considers it compensation. If not, why not just inform B6's management that they can keep their 401K match, since it can't be spent and therefore you don't consider it pay?

NEXT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
B)

Compensation is compensation, whether it's health benefits, retirement benefits, or W2 benefits.

It costs the company cold hard cash, and the lack of it costs the employee cold hard cash. (either now or in the future.) With no more profit sharing, your total compensation just took a hit, without even an objection from you or your fellow non-union employees. In fact you even sound happy about defending it! Unbelievable! 🙄

Why not just work for free while your at it.

 

[Blue Dude]

Profit sharing is a performance bonus. It is compensation, but it's not base pay or retirement. We don't give up anything to get it, so the lack of it is not a pay cut. The 401(k) match is not affected. By your logic, if you got a 10% bonus one year, and a 12% bonus the next, you got a 2% raise. No, you just got 2% more bonus than last year. Similarly, if you got 12% one year and 10% the next, you didn't get a 2% pay cut. You just got less bonus one year than the previous. This is not difficult.

 

[767jetz]

This is not difficult.

I agree, this is not difficult. I understand the difference between a performance incentive and base pay. I just take issue with those who claim it is not compensation. I've heard from many B6 pilots who have justified their lower-than-industry-standard wages with the "profit sharing" argument. They considered it pay then. Why suddenly not now?

The bottom line is that by paying a person a lower wage and making up for it with a performance incentive, there is a built in mechanism for lowering the employee’s total compensation when times are tough. If the reason for financial distress is the employees, one could argue that the performance incentive is a fair system of compensation. But if the reason for the financial distress is poor management (ie: pricing the product below cost), it is no longer a performance incentive program. The employee’s performance had nothing to do with the loss. It is now just a way for management to make up for their missteps.

B6 is no longer profitable, and as a result the employees compensation is now reduced.