Originally Posted by
marcal
I contacted my rep and was told any retirement plan introduced would be IN ADDITION to the 16% DC plan. I'm fine with that as long as it isn't funded by a lower DC contribution(i.e. 9% DC).
Do not change the present day DC negatively at all. It needs to remain intact.
I understand the "due diligence" argument, and people (here) would get upset if they didn't at least explore all options. However, is there any talk about beefing up the DC plan instead of trying to implement a DB plan? Is a new DB being pitched as the only avenue to improve retirement outlook? Yes, there are ways a DB plan could be shielded from uncertainty in the future, but there's no way it can be completely protected when it's not owned by the individual.
Wouldn't the bargaining capital be better spent on an increased percentage point (or two) for the DC plan or higher base pay in general (which would ultimately increase the amount being contributed).
These are all honest questions. I'm the FNG here so I'm still learning.