Originally Posted by
Tuck
Dlax - first question have you been to a FOCUS meeting? You appear very knowledgable in most areas but also appear like you don't really want the answers to some of your questions - you'd rather just post them to stir the pot. So I think before anyone puts out a huge opinion (not a question) they should say whether they've been to one. I've attended joint council meetings and FOCUS group discussions and read all the FAQs and there IS NO SUBSTITUTE for the FOCUS group meetings.
Dlax - you said
"Under the VB plan they will only be responsible guaranteeing the accrued floor benefit, if we successfully negotiate such a gauruntee"
- uh, no, - they are responsible for paying a % of total pilot salary - that % is to be negotiated but that is how the modeler was built - even if we well exceed the floor every year the CO still must give that same % to a more than likely ever increasing pilot salary
"The VB plan only significantly advantages those who are willing to work 30 or 35 years"
No, again - it's a huge increase for the jr and relatively young new hire. Take a guy who is 35 and just hired - he most likely plans to work 25-30 years - the VBP is a HUGE benefit to him over the current DB plan.
"Additionally, I don't believe the pension will be under the control of the Pilots and the Union. It will be run the same way as our current pension -- by Fedex. We are requesting a union/pilot rep on the management board."
No again - it will absolutely not be run by Fedex - There is no "request" for a union/pilot rep. Where in the world did you hear that?
Star Clipper
"One of the biggest concerns which is yet to be addressed, “ What happens if a guy goes on LTD at 45 but then returns at 55 where under the current A Plan he/she can still get their high 5?” There is no provision for that under the proposed VB Plan"
No, that is not correct. There is no "proposed" VB plan - there is a model and negotiations - the NC has said that current vesting rules for those under 5 YOS will be carried over to the new VBP - they have also said that the same LTD rules will be carried over to the new VBP - Question - did you attend a FOCUS meeting or ask the NC any of these questions?
TonyC
"pilots are encouraged to work while sick in order to preserve their entire sick bank to the last day. The Company takes from us a benefit we've already earned, our sick bank, and offers it back to us in the form of a perk in order to get us to work harder and longer. "
True - guess what, they were encouraged to work while sick even before the Sick Leave buy back program - everything over 686 paid out to your 401k or in cash - that's been in there forever I think?
"Sure, many pilots got the post-60/pre-Medicaid assistance and stayed longer anyway, but plenty of pilots took advantage of it and retired"
I have never heard that and have asked those same questions to former R&I chairs and there is no evidence that there were "plenty" of pilots that used that $25K to retire "early". Sorry - that was a terrible part of the 2006 CBA.
Tony I always get a kick out of when you use the term "union" as some sort of negative thing - like the union screwed us. First I would say we are the union. Second you were a member on that MEC when a lot of this stuff happened. I know you just ran again and I thank you for that - but to think that this union is some sort of foreign evil group is ridiculous and frankly part of the problem. THAT is number one why negotiating big changes like DB have always been near impossible here.
Dlax/Krusty and others - I believe we have two options with retirement - we either go forward with something like the VBP or we wait until 2021 and work on minor improvements to the B fund (or we can look at the VBP again in 2021). What makes you think that we would be able to negotiate a large improvement to the DB plan in 2021 when we couldn't do it in 2006, 2011 or 2015? Please don't use words like "should" get or "can afford it" - those terms are completely irrelevant in collective bargaining. We will get what we can fight for and that's it.
Yes, the company can afford indexing up our DB plan and they can afford an improvement to YOS and we do deserve it and (for Krusty) "should" get that but we won't - I have seen absolutely nothing from anyone or anything that leads me to believe otherwise. So we can spend another 3-4 years trying the same fight- get dragged along by the Company to extend negotiations on and on all the while throwing out terms like "we deserve it, they can afford it" and ultimately end up with virtually nothing....maybe a B fund improvement OR we can try something new.
All that being said, maybe this vehicle isn't the correct one - maybe a better VBP down the road is - I can see that for a lot of people on this thread, the numbers don't appear to be what people were expecting. So I'm for something new - I like this plan but I could maybe think of others in 2021 but do not believe that spending time and money trying to improve the current DB plan is fruitful.
Brother Tuck -
I have yet to attend a FOCUS meeting. There have been ZERO scheduled the nights I'm hub turning.
I've read all the Retirement FAQs. I know all the questions submitted have not been answered and posted.
Some simple ones...
What's the assumed pilot progression timeline?
What are the historical returns used within the modeler?
The specific equities index, the specific bond index, the assumed asset allocation, and the actual historical returns for each of these.
How do the results change if an investment earnings cap (notionally 10% in the first video) is applied to build the stabilization fund?
Please publish.
Are those valid questions? ...or do you think that's just stirring the pot?
I'm wondering if you understand how the company calculates the amount of money they must set aside to fund a given benefit level at a specific age -- ie. $130K at age 65 for the expected life of a pilot.
They utilize an Expected Return On Assets to estimate growth of their contributions, and a Discount Rate to discount a benefit liability over the expected life of a retiree.
If the VB actually guarantees a "floor benefit based on 2%" accrual, the company will not be assured they can ONLY contribute a fix percentage of salary.
That will only be true without a truly guaranteed floor benefit.
Please read many of my earlier posts.
If the company only has to contribute a fixed percentage of total payroll each year, then that's just like a BIG GROUP B fund --- except each pilot doesn't control their share, like our current B Plan. It's like a B fund, with an annuity payout at the end.
I do think the VB plan is a bad idea for the many reasons I state.
I do think improving our Total Retirement should be the goal (...I don't think anyone would disagree with that). Thus, its a valid question to ask is there a better path?
A way to improve both our current A fund and our B fund?
If so, let's model it.
Look back at my posts during contract negotiations. There was no talk then of indexing the Cap to IRS limits. No one in the union was publicly talking about that. The Caps being discussed were much higher.
When the union said the A fund Cap simply couldn't be raised, I suggested we should vote "No" and look for increases to the B fund up to 12-13%. We should have held out for more than just the two B fund bumps to 8%...then 9%.
I'm now only suggesting an indexed Cap because, its a new idea, and it would only yield a modest 5.7% increase, which I think the union can afford. I don't think we should have to switch to a VB plan and Career Average Earnings to get it. Those two concessions are just too big.
I'm unsure, if during negotiations, I was advocating increased 1% YOS multipliers for 5 more years --- but I believe that's an avenue which should be explored now because most pilots are working 4-5 years longer.
Now back to FOCUS group opportunities.
Can we have one EVERY Wed night in MEM and see how many guys sign up? I'll assume midweek, nights, in our largest hub would be the most convenient for the pilot group. That's the objective, right?
It seemed to me some of the day-turn offerings went unfilled. Hmmm.
Can we have another on-line survey in which everyone can participate (not random phone call poll)?
Is asking specific questions....and asking for alternative options 2 and 3 to be explored an unreasonable request for my 1.9% dues?
We're all owners/customer in our Association, correct?
In Unity and Transparency,
DLax