Mr. Parker Delta plus 7

[WeAAsles]

Because the average age at American is over 50 and higher at USAIR many will go for the money. Priorities change as you get close to retirement. Show me the money will allow us to make more on overtime and max out our 401K. Unfortunately for the guys in the loser IAMPF pension plan the contributions are the same. The UsAir guys have more of a reason to go for the money. I can't blame anyone for going that route. I would do the same. Some guys are better off working than taking a package if one will be available. This depends on age, the amount of compensation of a early out and the amount of debt one has accumulated. So show me the money is a strong selling point at this point of our careers.

Sometimes you write something that I can't argue against. This was one of them.

 

[1AA]

Sometimes you write something that I can't argue against. This was one of them.

I'm sure you can if you really try hard enough. LOL.

 

[WeAAsles]

I'm sure you can if you really try hard enough. LOL.

But then I'd be lying. We wouldn't want anyone to think there are liers on Forums now would we? h34r:

 

[swamt]

I'm not the one who posed the question can the pilots be hoodwinked out of their Profit Sharing in exchange for the "Me Too" clause being triggered.

That would be you.

C'mon THINK about your question.

Yes, very possible.  That is the draw back of a me too clause, either side is allowed to activate it when either sides finds that it applies because another work group (that is included in the "me too" language) received a change that might benefit in one area and not so much in another.  I highly doubt that the pilots would include a non-unionized group with in their "me too" clause, hence the question to Kev originally was could it get used by the co.  You have to be very careful with the wording within a "me too" clause as they very well could back fire.  And, if you don't think a co would use it to their advantage, just as a union would, is closed mind thinking.  It COULD and very well MAY happen, BUT, is Delta going to risk making such a move against an overwhelming No vote from the MEC?  Maybe though, just maybe the rank and file would have been willing to take a reduction in the PS total to get the added % of dollar for dollar along with 14.5% of a hard increase. I mean my gosh 14.5% of say 225,000.00 = 32,625 per year of a raise (using 225K as an example/average) that the pilots could use as they wish.  Has anyone ran the exact numbers for and average of how much PS would be reduced per pilot to compare?  Also let's not forget that PS is never a steady or a givin, at least with the 14.5% raises it is (or would have been) contractual and compounded for future raises.  Also, the hard raise will be used when pilots get extra flights or overtime how ever they make more money by working more, PS has no change.  PS, as we all know can also go completely away or at least massively reduced for years to come where the raises are perm and renego at amendable date which is where the new added % raise is compounded by the last 14.5% raise, therefore always helping future % increases in their contract.  By foregoing the 14.5% raise, all future pay raises will also be short that 14.5% that would have been compounded.  Most people look at only the short term. i honestly believe that the 14.5% raise MIGHT have been the better route.  The one thing that none of us know is, what was Delta trying to buy from the pilots with that big of an increase at once?  What other language, work rules, or concessions was the co trying to buy from them?  Another great example that people should read ALL the language instead of just seeing the $$$...

 

[WeAAsles]

Yes, very possible.  That is the draw back of a me too clause, either side is allowed to activate it when either sides finds that it applies because another work group (that is included in the "me too" language) received a change that might benefit in one area and not so much in another.  I highly doubt that the pilots would include a non-unionized group with in their "me too" clause, hence the question to Kev originally was could it get used by the co.  You have to be very careful with the wording within a "me too" clause as they very well could back fire.  And, if you don't think a co would use it to their advantage, just as a union would, is closed mind thinking.  It COULD and very well MAY happen, BUT, is Delta going to risk making such a move against an overwhelming No vote from the MEC?  Maybe though, just maybe the rank and file would have been willing to take a reduction in the PS total to get the added % of dollar for dollar along with 14.5% of a hard increase. I mean my gosh 14.5% of say 225,000.00 = 32,625 per year of a raise (using 225K as an example/average) that the pilots could use as they wish.  Has anyone ran the exact numbers for and average of how much PS would be reduced per pilot to compare?  Also let's not forget that PS is never a steady or a givin, at least with the 14.5% raises it is (or would have been) contractual and compounded for future raises.  Also, the hard raise will be used when pilots get extra flights or overtime how ever they make more money by working more, PS has no change.  PS, as we all know can also go completely away or at least massively reduced for years to come where the raises are perm and renego at amendable date which is where the new added % raise is compounded by the last 14.5% raise, therefore always helping future % increases in their contract.  By foregoing the 14.5% raise, all future pay raises will also be short that 14.5% that would have been compounded.  Most people look at only the short term. i honestly believe that the 14.5% raise MIGHT have been the better route.  The one thing that none of us know is, what was Delta trying to buy from the pilots with that big of an increase at once?  What other language, work rules, or concessions was the co trying to buy from them?  Another great example that people should read ALL the language instead of just seeing the $$$...

YEP??????

 

[ATD]

Who cares about the pilots they could care less about maintenance. Take this to the pilots discussion...

 

[AANOTOK]

Who cares about the pilots they could care less about maintenance. Take this to the pilots discussion...

Hey, that's funny, kinda your feeling about Fleet Service. You know, the overpaid bag throwers...Hypocrite!!

 

[AANOTOK]

The only time that anyone I know in Fleet calls any of you guys elitists is when you thumb your nose at us. When your guys think we're overpaid and if we made less then you could have more. Jobs or money is your decision to make? TUL carried the voting majority at one time so of course they voted to keep jobs. The scales are different now so it's up to you how you vote on that one?

I make far less per hour than you guys as I SHOULD of course. You went to school, you put in those long hours on nights. I have ZERO problem with how much you EARN. Just as long as your group doesn't say that I should earn less (For whatever reason you feel like getting involved in MY business)

And that wasn't directed at you AMFAinMIAMI. For the most part you've been fairly cool about that sort of thing.

Hey WeAAsles, ATD fits that description perfectly!

 

[ATD]

I am all about maintenance. If that makes me a Hipocrite then yes.

 

[bigjets]

You just asked and answered your own question.

I'll take "Why the negativity" for $500 Alex.
Answer is, The ASSociation.

 
That's a great point, my suggestion to the AA negotiators, if you keep to your word and offer delta +7, make sure the mechanics know what you offered. You don't want the mechanics to know you have no problems paying the flight crews top dollar, but are unwilling to pay mechanics the same way. I'll let the FSCs speak for themselves.

 

[WeAAsles]

I am all about maintenance. If that makes me a Hipocrite then yes.

Hypocrite.

( You do know that spell check makes things much easier right?)

 

[AANOTOK]

I guess there are those who feel the same as ATD WeAAsles, are they are really into Hypocrisy.

 

[MetalMover]

Hypocrite.

( You do know that spell check makes things much easier right?)

WeAAsles, maybe you should try spell check as well....After all you are not a LIER...
 

But then I'd be lying. We wouldn't want anyone to think there are liers on Forums now would we?

Sorry buddy, I couldn't resist. 

 

[WeAAsles]

WeAAsles, maybe you should try spell check as well....After all you are not a LIER...
 

Sorry buddy, I couldn't resist.

Doh! Busted.

There, Their and They're was one I used to mess up on quite a bit.

"I before e except after c"

 

[Roadking5560]

Except for for the word receive which we as TWU members don't see used much!  LOL