American Airlines and Labor Negotiations

[NYer]

I think you are wrong, try it, 3204.24(my contribution), 4% of (my contribution) is 128.17, sorry I can't see reading this any differently.

It isn't 4% of your contribution, it is 4% of your gross.

"In addition, the company would match employee contributions up to 4% of the team member’s salary, for a total company contribution of up to 9%." --LAA email 3/23

For your interpretation to work it would need to say:

"In addition, the company would match employee contributions up to 4%..., " --LAA email 3/23

 

[bob@las-AA]

I believe this is the right calculation Bob.

It is not, I think everyone is seeing this as a big payday, but it is not.

Lets us this as a example, a snippet from the UA contract. Using our TOS as a example and 15 years, this works out as 50% of my before tax contributions, using the same 5% I you put in,

(3204.24 x .06) x .5 = 1922.54

Max match = 3%
(64084.8 x .03) = 1922.54

It is absolutely a play on words, now for us, the 5% match is on our gross, and the 4% match is matching up to 4% of our contributions.

 

[Steve Walegir]

The meaning of they will contribute up to 4% of your contribution refers to our percentage of the gross pay and not a percentage of your contribution.

So reading a little deeper into this, is AA saying they will match 4% of our contribution for all hours worked or just scheduled hours? I don't recall it mentioned either way from any of their outside negioations emails or video's.

 

[NYer]

The meaning of they will contribute up to 4% of your contribution refers to our percentage of the gross pay and not a percentage of your contribution.

So reading a little deeper into this, is AA saying they will match 4% of our contribution for all hours worked or just scheduled hours? I don't recall it mentioned either way from any of their outside negioations emails or video's.

That's the part that is unclear because they refer to "salary" and that can be interpreted in either way, all hours worked or base pay.

 

[NYer]

It is absolutely a play on words, now for us, the 5% match is on our gross, and the 4% match is matching up to 4% of our contributions.

OK. Where did you get the interpretation of 4% of our contributions?

 

[bob@las-AA]

It isn't 4% of your contribution, it is 4% of your gross.

"In addition, the company would match employee contributions up to 4% of the team member’s salary, for a total company contribution of up to 9%." --LAA email 3/23

For your interpretation to work it would need to say:

"In addition, the company would match employee contributions up to 4%..., " --LAA email 3/23

Wrong, what does this say, contributions, what are our contributions, the percentage of our pretax earnings(gross). My current
contribution is 20%, so you are saying that we would get a additional match from our gross,

Doing it your way has this result.

Using your own language "In your example, it should be a total of 14% of your pay."

That's $8971.87 a year just from the company, and adding in my contributions $12817.00, that's a total of $21788.80 for the year. Get real dude.

 

[bob@las-AA]

OK. Where did you get the interpretation of 4% of our contributions?

Are you and Weez playing me, because this has a stench about it. Don't get me wrong, I don't mind.

 

[bob@las-AA]

The meaning of they will contribute up to 4% of your contribution refers to our percentage of the gross pay and not a percentage of your contribution.

So reading a little deeper into this, is AA saying they will match 4% of our contribution for all hours worked or just scheduled hours? I don't recall it mentioned either way from any of their outside negioations emails or video's.

You must have been drinking too much eggnog, and you too are wrong, so if, and I say this with the upmost conviction, why pray tell didn't the company just say we are raising the match on gross income up to 9%.

 

[NYer]

Wrong, what does this say, contributions, what are our contributions, the percentage of our pretax earnings(gross). My current
contribution is 20%, so you are saying that we would get a additional match from our gross,

Doing it your way has this result.

Using your own language "In your example, it should be a total of 14% of your pay."

That's $8971.87 a year just from the company, and adding in my contributions $12817.00, that's a total of $21788.80 for the year. Get real dude.

5% LAA contribution + 5% Member contribution + 4% LAA match = 14% (9% from LAA and 5% from Member)

 

[NYer]

Are you and Weez playing me, because this has a stench about it. Don't get me wrong, I don't mind.

He's a non-entity.

 

[bob@las-AA]

5% LAA contribution + 5% Member contribution + 4% LAA match = 14% (9% from LAA and 5% from Member)

I never thought I would see the day that you and weez would collaborate.

 

[NYer]

You must have been drinking too much eggnog, and you too are wrong, so if, and I say this with the upmost conviction, why pray tell didn't the company just say we are raising the match on gross income up to 9%.

They did.

Their March March 23rd email: "All TWU-IAM-represented team members would transition to an enhanced 401(k) plan. Company contributions would be an automatic 5% of your annual salary (no matching funds required by members)...In addition, the company would match employee contributions up to 4% of the team member’s salary, for a total company contribution of up to 9%..."

 

[NYer]

I never thought I would see the day that you and weez would collaborate.

Don't be insulting, we're having a good conversation.

 

[WeAAsles]

Are you and Weez playing me, because this has a stench about it. Don't get me wrong, I don't mind.

There are plenty of areas where I would capitulate to NYer’s knowledge or skills. Deciphering language and the mathematics of interpretating the 401k are two of those.

Your Math to me (I’m not doing any calculations you see) just doesn’t make any sense for the Company to even announce as any type of improvement as you interpret it.

So for $127.00 for the YEAR I should storm the Association Fort and demand they let me vote?

 

[WeAAsles]

I never thought I would see the day that you and weez would collaborate.

I think it’s in the deciphering of language where you draw most of your confusion.

I was hoping more that P. Rez or Crema would correct your mistakes over NYer and why I didn’t mention him as well. But he’s just as proficient, although you don’t seem to believe anyone anyway Bob. You’re very thick headed.