Originally Posted by
FDXLAG
Can't quibble with a thing you said. But I said it sounded like a B Scale in order to impress on the outsider the issue who said some of us were essentially calling for a B Scale Retirement. A different retirement plan does not necessarily mean a B Scale retirement plan.
I like how that's phrased.
If I were 40 and starting today, knowing the A plan is likely a dinosaur as the current TA implies, I would be inclined to prefer a strong B plan. Some have asked what the numbers should be. I don't know, there are too many variables for me. But the actuaries could figure it out at ALPA.
We've heard informed speculation say you need 2.1 to 2.8 million to get an annuity to replace our A fund. But annuities are tremendously affected by the rate assumed which could be changing favorably in the next couple of years. I would assume we base it on a 25 year "standard" career, and you would have to look at assumed inflation rates, assumed pay rates based on typical seat progression, and other variables to come up with a net present value to shoot for. Then we have to take a look at IRS limits and see if they're hit. Waaaay too complicated for me to give a number.
But, I like your phrasing that changing the retirement for new hires could be of equal and more secure value to them. If the TA passes, it's a moot point. If it doesn't, this is the major area we should talk about and be polled.