Jetblue Counts Profit Sharing TWICE in Pay Review

[Smarta$$]

Hey Smarta$$! Thoughts....

Why are you asking for my thoughts? I had a problem with mis-representing basic math.

It was made well clear that numbers can be accurately represented both ways. What more do you want to discuss?

 

[J32driver]

Nevermind. I guess you are just ignoring what happened today. I can handle ignorant. I can handle obstinate. I can't deal with both at the same time.

 

[Smarta$$]

How am I ignoring what happened today?

 

[BeachBummer]

Both of course! Here, have a slice of pizza. Now, what route do you think we should fly?

Both!~ Duh.... god, I feel silly. LOL


I'm still holding out for HPN-JFK, lots of business travelers. It would be a great economy of scale.
Good ROIC

 

[1.3XVso]

I just finally had time to read this post in full. What ********************ing Bull$hit. Since you posted after me, I will quote for you from my previous post (before your post):

"Is 13% 30% higher than 10%? Yes. But the 3% number is clearly in reference to a 3% salary match...."

There is no doubt that on a PERCENTAGE COMPARISON basis, we are 30% (or more) behind on retirement.

My original post regarding 3% vs. 30% was in response to this (note the underlined):

"Bluejet says you are only 3% behind your peers because you get a 5% match plus 5% profit sharing for a total of 10%. (For those of you that are math challenged, that makes us 30% short of our peers... not 3%)."




The problem is that the 3% number and the 30% number are NOT interchangable. You cannot simply say that the 3% number is incorrect, and should be changed to 30%. They are in entirely different contexts and used in two DIFFERENT math formulas.

The 3% figure is used in a unit comparison, where 1 unit=1% of salary matching. This is THE standard unit of evaluating 401k retirement matching. Jetblue deposits 10% of your salary into your 401k. That is 10 units of 1% salary match. Industry average is 13%, or 13 units of 1% salary match.

13-10= a deficit of 3 units of 1% salary matching. (note the addition/subtraction math operation and the context of unit comparison)

The other method is to compare our retirement match on a percentage basis. This method has you compare 10% to 13% as the percentage of increase required to raise our retirememt contribution to standard.

This formula is a multiplication/division formula.

10%*1.3=13% which is an increase of 30%
----------------------------------------------------------------

For the stupid knuckle dragging Apes on here, I have NO problem with either way of representing the numbers. Both are 100% mathematically valid.

However, I have a problem with trying to interchange the numbers by saying 3% is wrong, and should simply be replaced by 30%.

They are to different mathematical formulas, using two different orders of operation and are used in two different contexts.

Period.

We are 3% behind on a unit basis, and 30% behind on a percentage basis.

Period.

Loooool don't worry smartazz also drank the 9e koolaide.

 

[Smarta$$]

Loooool don't worry smartazz also drank the 9e koolaide.

This little pimple face a$$clown again...

I Fu#$%&ng hated pinnacle airlines. You clearly have me confused with someone else. I have 1600 posts on this forum, quote me saying pinnacle was a good or respectable airline....

Goodbye tool!

 

[1.3XVso]

This little pimple face a$$clown again...

I Fu#$%&ng hated pinnacle airlines. You clearly have me confused with someone else. I have 1600 posts on this forum, quote me saying pinnacle was a good or respectable airline....

Goodbye tool!

Juice!