So sayeth the wires...

http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/2 ... Tax-Reform

"...we are excited to announce we will be paying every Crewmember employed as of December 31, 2017, a $1,000 bonus by the end of February!"

What's with the $1K bonuses. Is there some kind of write off written into the new tax law?

Yea, it makes you wonder, doesn't it? Everybody the same. JetBlue, AA, WN, AT&T, and others, all with the same exact 1k bonuses. I mean, great, I'm glad to get it, but it brings out the cynical side of me............

william wrote:

What's with the $1K bonuses. Is there some kind of write off written into the new tax law?

1K is probably just to match everyone else.

Now if only the retail business can follow suit!

Congrats to the employees at B6! Given how AS likes to do things for employees, I'm sure they'll be doing a $1K bonus for all employees as well.

Boy, I bet the UA and AS people are getting a little steamed?

hiflyeras wrote:

Boy, I bet the UA and AS people are getting a little steamed?

Why would we be getting steamed? We either get it or we don't. I'd like to think that they will give us one at UA, but my heart won't be broken if we don't.

hiflyeras wrote:

Boy, I bet the UA and AS people are getting a little steamed?

LOL nope! Brad Tilden and Ben Minicucci just announced $1K bonuses for all AS/QX/VX employees to be paid on 1/31/18!!

william wrote:

What's with the $1K bonuses. Is there some kind of write off written into the new tax law?

Salaries and benefits are pre-tax on the firm's income statement. With the chanes in the corporate tax code, more money is going to flow to net income (after taxes). As a result, some companies are choosing to allocate some of their anticipated after-tax savings as increased benefits to their employees.

I think the management of many companies were sensitive to the fact that passing 100% of the tax savings to shareholders would be viewed negatively by the public, so they have instead chosen to distribute the gains in a variety of ways (employee benefits, reinvestment, and yes, dividends and buy-backs).

Well, seeing that "Jet Blue" is the official carrier of Progressives in America, I expect these crew members to donate that extra money to their favorite charities....
After all, were it not for Republicans and (dare I say it....?) President Trump, none of the economic boom that is happening now would've been possible.

md11sdf wrote:

Well, seeing that "Jet Blue" is the official carrier of Progressives in America, I expect these crew members to donate that extra money to their favorite charities....
After all, were it not for Republicans and (dare I say it....?) President Trump, none of the economic boom that is happening now would've been possible.

MODS - the above post should be deleted. Off topic and a fair bit inane.

I heard all NK employees are receiving a free High Five (normally $5.00)

SXDFC wrote:

I heard all NK employees are receiving a free High Five (normally $5.00)

Gabrielz wrote:

md11sdf wrote:

Well, seeing that "Jet Blue" is the official carrier of Progressives in America, I expect these crew members to donate that extra money to their favorite charities....
After all, were it not for Republicans and (dare I say it....?) President Trump, none of the economic boom that is happening now would've been possible.

MODS - the above post should be deleted. Off topic and a fair bit inane.

Inane? Are people really that triggered by facts? He simply made an accurate and factual statement.

md11sdf wrote:

Well, seeing that "Jet Blue" is the official carrier of Progressives in America, I expect these crew members to donate that extra money to their favorite charities....
After all, were it not for Republicans and (dare I say it....?) President Trump, none of the economic boom that is happening now would've been possible.

It's a fair point; thanks to the efforts of the President and the GOP side of Congress, you're now seeing literally hundreds of thousands of Americans who work for various air carriers getting a nice bonus they wouldn't have had otherwise.

Gabrielz wrote:

md11sdf wrote:

Well, seeing that "Jet Blue" is the official carrier of Progressives in America, I expect these crew members to donate that extra money to their favorite charities....
After all, were it not for Republicans and (dare I say it....?) President Trump, none of the economic boom that is happening now would've been possible.

MODS - the above post should be deleted. Off topic and a fair bit inane.

Sensitive are we?

Gabrielz wrote:

md11sdf wrote:

Well, seeing that "Jet Blue" is the official carrier of Progressives in America, I expect these crew members to donate that extra money to their favorite charities....
After all, were it not for Republicans and (dare I say it....?) President Trump, none of the economic boom that is happening now would've been possible.

MODS - the above post should be deleted. Off topic and a fair bit inane.

And here you have a prime specimen of today's left. Triggered so easily, then insist that something they disagree with be banished, because heaven forbid someone doesn't agree with them. Get a grip.

MAH4546 wrote:

Gabrielz wrote:

md11sdf wrote:

Well, seeing that "Jet Blue" is the official carrier of Progressives in America, I expect these crew members to donate that extra money to their favorite charities....
After all, were it not for Republicans and (dare I say it....?) President Trump, none of the economic boom that is happening now would've been possible.

MODS - the above post should be deleted. Off topic and a fair bit inane.

Inane? Are people really that triggered by facts? He simply made an accurate and factual statement.

Yes this post is 100% factual. No conservative has EVER flown JetBlue. Their planes (obviously made from some foreign company), are stuffed to the brim with a bunch of liberals in Hillary t-shirts.

Now, of course the current president and Congress has obviously had some effect on the economic growth but we cannot interpret other timelines (where the popular vote would have mattered), and therefore cannot say that if someone else was in office we would not have experienced as much growth.

But, alas, only the hand of god himself could bring us our savior with his economic boom.

Sorry for going off topic, but if this gets deleted, so should the original political comment.

Who needs open skies when you can have tax subsidies that make you look like a hypocrite?

Gabrielz wrote:

md11sdf wrote:

Well, seeing that "Jet Blue" is the official carrier of Progressives in America, I expect these crew members to donate that extra money to their favorite charities....
After all, were it not for Republicans and (dare I say it....?) President Trump, none of the economic boom that is happening now would've been possible.

MODS - the above post should be deleted. Off topic and a fair bit inane.

Insane is more like it.

keitherson wrote:

Who needs open skies when you can have tax subsidies that make you look like a hypocrite?

What is this supposed to mean? That jetBlue is getting a "tax subsidy" from the government? Hardly. The U.S. corporate tax rate was previously one of the highest in the developed world at 35%. In 2016, jetBlue actually paid an effective corporate tax rate of 37%. With the tax reform bill, the U.S. corporate tax rate is now squarely average with the developed world at 21%.

The U.S. is a country of private property rights. The money jetBlue will save in taxes always belonged to jetBlue. They earned it by providing a value-added service to consumers. Now they will keep more of their own property. That's no subsidy by any definition of the world.

EA CO AS wrote:

md11sdf wrote:

Well, seeing that "Jet Blue" is the official carrier of Progressives in America, I expect these crew members to donate that extra money to their favorite charities....
After all, were it not for Republicans and (dare I say it....?) President Trump, none of the economic boom that is happening now would've been possible.

It's a fair point; thanks to the efforts of the President and the GOP side of Congress, you're now seeing literally hundreds of thousands of Americans who work for various air carriers getting a nice bonus they wouldn't have had otherwise.

lipstick on a pig. I'll take it, because just down the road it's highly likely that, in addition to the huge deficit this will cause, our tax rates will all go up to subsidize these corporate tax breaks. If Alaska gives me $1k next year, and the year after and the year after, then maybe I'll look at it differently. Trump and the GOP's tax plan is a pig and this is just a little lipstick.

planespotter20 wrote:

MAH4546 wrote:

Gabrielz wrote:

MODS - the above post should be deleted. Off topic and a fair bit inane.

Inane? Are people really that triggered by facts? He simply made an accurate and factual statement.

Yes this post is 100% factual. No conservative has EVER flown JetBlue. Their planes (obviously made from some foreign company), are stuffed to the brim with a bunch of liberals in Hillary t-shirts.

Now, of course the current president and Congress has obviously had some effect on the economic growth but we cannot interpret other timelines (where the popular vote would have mattered), and therefore cannot say that if someone else was in office we would not have experienced as much growth.

But, alas, only the hand of god himself could bring us our savior with his economic boom.

Sorry for going off topic, but if this gets deleted, so should the original political comment.

He never said that no conservatives fly JetBlue. He gave his opinion that JetBlue is an airline frequented by progressives, which given its bases, is probably accurate. It's amazing how liberals try so hard to deflect the current economic boom, which conservatives are wholly responsible for. In my opinion you want it deleted simply because it annoys you to hear that fact stated. Even communist-like, anti-capitalist countries like France don't have the inane corporate taxation rates that our previous liberal government unfairly imposed upon corporations such as JetBlue.

"We expect that lower taxes, under the new law, will enable us to make investments that will make us bigger and stronger in the years ahead, so that we can continue to do good things for everyone who depends on us." -Brad Tilden, CEO of Alaska Airlines

I thought that corporations were only going to do stock buybacks and that the new tax bill wouldn't lead to any significant investment?

There's so much misinformation surrounding the new tax law that it's scary. The Association of Flight Attendants issued a disgraceful condemnation of the bill informing its members that they'd be losing write-offs...but completely failing to mention that the standard deduction is doubled!

As a UA crewmember - sure, I'd welcome the $1,000 (before taxes) bonus but, BUT -- I'd much rather have better staffing on our 77W (two extra f/as ) and our 739s (one extra) - - Adequate staffing is sorely needed, for safety , security and service . It's outrageous too that we HAVE NOT yet merged inflight crew operations !!

Since most of these employees are likely to be based in New York, maybe they can use that money to offset part of the loss of the property and state tax deductions they're going to get hit with next year. $1k won't cover the full amount, though.

(You can tell I'm dealing with this myself.)

While a $1000 bonus is nice, it has no real effect over one's career. It can reasonably be assumed that the airline(s) will be getting a long-term financial benefit from the tax changes. As such, a much more meaningful action would be be to give raises, not one-time bonuses.

B52overSMF wrote:

While a $1000 bonus is nice, it has no real effect over one's career. It can reasonably be assumed that the airline(s) will be getting a long-term financial benefit from the tax changes. As such, a much more meaningful action would be be to give raises, not one-time bonuses.

I don’t disagree. But I’d also argue that greater corporate profits puts the unions in a better position to negotiate higher pay scales as CBAs become amendable.

MAH4546 wrote:

In my opinion you want it deleted simply because it annoys you to hear that fact stated.

I'll tell ya, I'd like this whole thread moved because I don't come to this site, or at least the civil aviation portion of this site, to discuss corporate tax policy, I come here to discuss aviation. Now if the discussion was solely how the tax cut affects JetBlue, then I'd welcome it, but the aviation aspect appears to have dwindled into a generic discussion on the policy, and that doesn't belong here.

UPDATE: Appears it was moved, enjoy your discussion guys!

william wrote:

What's with the $1K bonuses. Is there some kind of write off written into the new tax law?

It reminds the general population and voters that big business does care. They care enough to give $1000 taxable income one time. Instead of raising wages or lowering the cost of health care for employees or lowering the cost of child care or anything significant, we employees will "enjoy" paying taxes on this extra $1000 and some will even vote for the yahoos that wanted this tax cut.

It is just a ruse.

It is psychology. If I give you a big present once, you will remember it stronger and more positively as if I give you many small presents regularly and over a long time.

In addition regular gifts create a from of felt entitlement that means people expect those gifts and in the end believe they have a right to get it.

In the end you can give a one time 1000$ bonus and increase the health care costs by 100$ a month and people will have more positive feelings, than when the firm covers the increased health care costs.

Raises will happen naturally, as companies approve / enlarge future operational projects and hire greater numbers of people (or, hire YOU for slightly more money).

Or, if you believe companies will not enlarge operations given this higher earning retention, that is a viewpoint too. I think most observers would say it is incorrect.

MAH4546 wrote:

planespotter20 wrote:

MAH4546 wrote:

Inane? Are people really that triggered by facts? He simply made an accurate and factual statement.

Yes this post is 100% factual. No conservative has EVER flown JetBlue. Their planes (obviously made from some foreign company), are stuffed to the brim with a bunch of liberals in Hillary t-shirts.

Now, of course the current president and Congress has obviously had some effect on the economic growth but we cannot interpret other timelines (where the popular vote would have mattered), and therefore cannot say that if someone else was in office we would not have experienced as much growth.

But, alas, only the hand of god himself could bring us our savior with his economic boom.

Sorry for going off topic, but if this gets deleted, so should the original political comment.

He never said that no conservatives fly JetBlue. He gave his opinion that JetBlue is an airline frequented by progressives, which given its bases, is probably accurate. It's amazing how liberals try so hard to deflect the current economic boom, which conservatives are wholly responsible for. In my opinion you want it deleted simply because it annoys you to hear that fact stated. Even communist-like, anti-capitalist countries like France don't have the inane corporate taxation rates that our previous liberal government unfairly imposed upon corporations such as JetBlue.

You think France is communist-like and anti-capitalist? Once a persons world view has become this progressively deluded, I think they need to ask “how did this happen and what can I do to change it?” Conservatives seem to have a really hard time grasping the complexities of the world, so they use simplistic spin words they hear on Fox News. France is not what you’re saying it is.

DfwRevolution wrote:

The U.S. is a country of private property rights. The money jetBlue will save in taxes always belonged to jetBlue. They earned it by providing a value-added service to consumers. Now they will keep more of their own property. That's no subsidy by any definition of the world.

Actually it is expected several provisions in the tax bill will end up at the WTO, where the US will eventually lose (has happened before). Not the lower corporate tax, though, that's obviously legal.

scoping2008 wrote:

"We expect that lower taxes, under the new law, will enable us to make investments that will make us bigger and stronger in the years ahead, so that we can continue to do good things for everyone who depends on us." -Brad Tilden, CEO of Alaska Airlines

I thought that corporations were only going to do stock buybacks and that the new tax bill wouldn't lead to any significant investment?

Doing stock buyback IS an investment. But that's money to enhance shareholder value, not passenger experience or employee salaries.

scoping2008 wrote:

There's so much misinformation surrounding the new tax law that it's scary. The Association of Flight Attendants issued a disgraceful condemnation of the bill informing its members that they'd be losing write-offs...but completely failing to mention that the standard deduction is doubled!

Apples and oranges. AFA is rightly condemning how they lose benefits while companies keep it.

An employee that HAS to relocate for a job will not be able to write-off moving expenses; a company will retain that credit.

An employee that has to buy supplies for work (uniforms, office supplies, etc.) will not be able to deduct those expenses; a company still retains that benefit.

A doubling of the standard deduction only goes so far. But what's the point if it's only a temporary benefit while companies keep all their loopholes and more on a permanent basis (i.e. until a future Congress decided to tackle the issue)?

md11sdf wrote:

Well, seeing that "Jet Blue" is the official carrier of Progressives in America, I expect these crew members to donate that extra money to their favorite charities....
After all, were it not for Republicans and (dare I say it....?) President Trump, none of the economic boom that is happening now would've been possible.

Oh you work for jetblue?
Funny I voted Trump and I work there. While the company does support some “left wing” things did you miss our planes painted for Military Vets or the NYPD or the FDNY? I’m sure you knew that when the two NYPD officers were murdered sitting in their car jetblue quietly flew members of law enforcement to NY for free.
I would say they represent the people who work for them. We all come from different views but it is certainly not this progressive machine you think it is. Do we need to get into the vets in blue program where the company goes out of its way to hire former military. I have also had multiple FA crews made up of former firefighters or cops or emts. I don’t think people are triggered I think they just wat a fair post.

spacecadet wrote:

Since most of these employees are likely to be based in New York, maybe they can use that money to offset part of the loss of the property and state tax deductions they're going to get hit with next year. $1k won't cover the full amount, though.

(You can tell I'm dealing with this myself.)

Very few airline employee's live where they're based, especially when it comes to high rent, progressive holes like NYC...

DiamondFlyer wrote:

spacecadet wrote:

Since most of these employees are likely to be based in New York, maybe they can use that money to offset part of the loss of the property and state tax deductions they're going to get hit with next year. $1k won't cover the full amount, though.

(You can tell I'm dealing with this myself.)

Very few airline employee's live where they're based, especially when it comes to high rent, progressive holes like NYC...

Your statement might be true of pilots and FA's and maybe a couple dispatchers but the ground employees for the most part live there or within driving distance and in the case of JFK all the surrounding areas are progressive high tax holes as you point out. Also JFK is not the easiest to commute in and out of even for pilots.

EA CO AS wrote:

md11sdf wrote:

Well, seeing that "Jet Blue" is the official carrier of Progressives in America, I expect these crew members to donate that extra money to their favorite charities....
After all, were it not for Republicans and (dare I say it....?) President Trump, none of the economic boom that is happening now would've been possible.

It's a fair point; thanks to the efforts of the President and the GOP side of Congress, you're now seeing literally hundreds of thousands of Americans who work for various air carriers getting a nice bonus they wouldn't have had otherwise.

No, it's not a fair point. This is what he said: "Progressives fly JetBlue, so the airline employees should give their bonuses to charity".

EA CO AS wrote:

md11sdf wrote:

Well, seeing that "Jet Blue" is the official carrier of Progressives in America, I expect these crew members to donate that extra money to their favorite charities....
After all, were it not for Republicans and (dare I say it....?) President Trump, none of the economic boom that is happening now would've been possible.

It's a fair point; thanks to the efforts of the President and the GOP side of Congress, you're now seeing literally hundreds of thousands of Americans who work for various air carriers getting a nice bonus they wouldn't have had otherwise.

That $1000 will have to be taxed (that is on the employees, not the company) adding to an already burdened middle class. Add to that the fact that health care costs more thanks to the "wonderful" right wing tax scam.

Besides, what about the rest of us that need $1000? What about those employees who want that extra $1000 to be monthly?

This whole thing is a sham and it will come back to bite each and ever rightie. Mark my words. You all will regret this tax scam.

spacecadet wrote:

Since most of these employees are likely to be based in New York, maybe they can use that money to offset part of the loss of the property and state tax deductions they're going to get hit with next year. $1k won't cover the full amount, though.

(You can tell I'm dealing with this myself.)

This has exposed the hidden subsidy that high tax states receive, as well as their reliance on it.

EA CO AS wrote:

It's a fair point; thanks to the efforts of the President and the GOP side of Congress, you're now seeing literally hundreds of thousands of Americans who work for various air carriers getting a nice bonus they wouldn't have had otherwise.

Tell that to all the airline workers in states like New York, California or Illinois.

Route66 wrote:

spacecadet wrote:

Since most of these employees are likely to be based in New York, maybe they can use that money to offset part of the loss of the property and state tax deductions they're going to get hit with next year. $1k won't cover the full amount, though.

(You can tell I'm dealing with this myself.)

This has exposed the hidden subsidy that high tax states receive, as well as their reliance on it.

The sales tax and mortgage deductions were from all states, not just "high tax" states.

Besides, "high tax" states subsidize "low tax" states like Alabama and Kansas.

md11sdf wrote:

After all, were it not for Republicans and (dare I say it....?) President Trump, none of the economic boom that is happening now would've been possible.

None of which is true of course.

seb146 wrote:

Route66 wrote:

spacecadet wrote:

Since most of these employees are likely to be based in New York, maybe they can use that money to offset part of the loss of the property and state tax deductions they're going to get hit with next year. $1k won't cover the full amount, though.

(You can tell I'm dealing with this myself.)

This has exposed the hidden subsidy that high tax states receive, as well as their reliance on it.

The sales tax and mortgage deductions were from all states, not just "high tax" states.

Besides, "high tax" states subsidize "low tax" states like Alabama and Kansas.

Sure it is all states but how many people pay over $10k in state and local taxes? In California, for example, anybody paying more than $10k in income and property tax is doing well enough to lose this subsidy. And there are still mortgage interest deductions up to $1 million and $750k for first time homeowners. Why do you expect the poor people of Alabama to subsidize the wealthy and their high tax rates?

stratosphere wrote:

DiamondFlyer wrote:

spacecadet wrote:

Since most of these employees are likely to be based in New York, maybe they can use that money to offset part of the loss of the property and state tax deductions they're going to get hit with next year. $1k won't cover the full amount, though.

(You can tell I'm dealing with this myself.)

Very few airline employee's live where they're based, especially when it comes to high rent, progressive holes like NYC...

Your statement might be true of pilots and FA's and maybe a couple dispatchers but the ground employees for the most part live there or within driving distance and in the case of JFK all the surrounding areas are progressive high tax holes as you point out. Also JFK is not the easiest to commute in and out of even for pilots.

I know of about 2-dozen UA employees in DEN who don't live in Denver. I'm one of them, I live in OKC and work in DEN.

This thread goes nicely with all the JetBlue bashing and general hatred for them on this forum, and for the life of me I never could understand why. If they shutdown tomorrow you'd all be celebrating in the streets with champagne flowing. Shame on all of you.

md11sdf wrote:

Well, seeing that "Jet Blue" is the official carrier of Progressives in America.

Is it really? Most of my liberal friends in Los Angeles, New York and San Francisco(who could buy and sell the average flyover country magat a thousand times over) fly American and United. On the other hand the people I know who fly JetBlue are bigoted and homophobic geriatrics from Florida and Boston.

Route66 wrote:

seb146 wrote:

Route66 wrote:

This has exposed the hidden subsidy that high tax states receive, as well as their reliance on it.

The sales tax and mortgage deductions were from all states, not just "high tax" states.

Besides, "high tax" states subsidize "low tax" states like Alabama and Kansas.

Sure it is all states but how many people pay over $10k in state and local taxes? In California, for example, anybody paying more than $10k in income and property tax is doing well enough to lose this subsidy. And there are still mortgage interest deductions up to $1 million and $750k for first time homeowners. Why do you expect the poor people of Alabama to subsidize the wealthy and their high tax rates?

wow.... You know NOTHING about people who pay over $10K in state AND local taxes. Sure, some can afford it. Some, like those of us who work, can not afford it. We want those deductions. Just like the people of Alabama and Kansas want welfare.