Originally Posted by
kronan
Plenty of FO's in the past had the ability to fly C\O with layovers at home and wound up with similar income levels.
Just my opinion that this is the new norm, and that I shouldn't get a 40% improvement to my pension while someone with the same takehome (or greater) only gets a 10% improvement unless they Upgrade.
There's not a Capt rate to the B plan, don't think there should be one for our A plan
Yeah, I get it. Your post I responded to made it sound like the FO being able to hit his high 5 was designed into the pension in 1999. I was just pointing out, that option is simply a result of the math resulting from a stagnant A-plan maximum in conjunction with increasing pay rates. I'm an A-plan fan and I'd like to see it improved. I'm also not trying to create a disparity in someone's ability to max out their pension given the current situation.
However, that disparity is a fact of life if a pension is designed to pay a retiree 50% of the maximum amount our contract allows someone to earn (while complying with IRS limits). That's how the pension was designed in 1999. There wasn't an FO on the property capable of earning enough to stay an FO and get a $130K per year when he retired.
If we designed our pension today using the same model, that would also be true. So the disparity would be there, like it or not.