Originally Posted by
Noworkallplay
It sounds like my points may be a bit misconstrued. Let me try to simplify what im saying.
1.) I hear a lot of “the older group” saying I will only look at an increase to the current A plan. Well, if that is so, why didnt you do that and hold the line on those increases the past 20 + years when it was not improved? Im not saying this trying to be divisive its just the facts of the past. Why is it “the younger groups” job to fix 20+ years of them not standing up as they walk out the door?
2.) I love this job and have said we have the industry best contract numerous times on this forum. In fact, I have even got a little heated with those who constantly complain about the tiny items and miss the elephant in the room.
3.) Im just very confused on why we would continue to stay in a pension formula that we have not been able to increase in over 20 years. Why would we not look at a different formula that adds value for us and is self increasing and sustaining. If we need to buy a few up so be it. We are a team so lets lift a few up that may be behind in the new formula.
4.) Im a team player and very much enjoy the people I fly with. I honestly have a fun time going to work (even when COVID has everything shut down).
5.) I hope we find a way forward and get together for this contract and get it rite with retirement. Lets not get in the weeds trying to mess with 10-15 things and creat new things.
1. Why do you think it’s “the younger group’s” job to fix our (all of our) pension? Do you get multiple votes? Do you want an improved pension (in whatever form we can get)?
You act like we’re asking you to dive on the hand grenade for us. I’d have no problem allowing a choice in pension plans if they are improved choices for all of us.
BTW, the company offered less than 17% last contract and it had a cap. Sorry I don’t remember the details, but it wasn’t unlimited. If you would want to raise that cap, you’d have to negotiate that as well.
The A plan was improved in 2006 for certain groups. What, I thought you said we’ve never been able to make any progress? They raised the multiplier for certain groups closer to retirement (I believe over 50 and a specified number of years of service). I believe the multiplier went to 2.2% for some (143k). So some that retired under the 2006 contract will get more than someone retiring today. It was a band-aid fix, but did increase the benefit for some. And $130k still sounded pretty decent in 2006. Having a $260k high five was pretty good at that time.
Our next contract was 2015 (we had a two year extension of the 2006 contract). We utterly failed here. Many of us were adamant “no” voters and are on record here saying it then. It’s not like we’ve had multiple contracts where we didn’t “fix” retirement. Really just one really big fail. We have another chance soon. I’m open to most ideas that will give us a significant bump. A fund improvements, cash over cap B fund (with our current A), flat dollar...