Originally Posted by
golfandfly
If anyone could botch the contract language, that would be us. Make the floor $150k and you at least have my attention. It’s a ridiculously complex plan. We’ve got a great concept now, let’s just try and improve what we have. Add a cash over cap B fund, and/or a significantly higher percentage. Increased multiplier, higher FAE. Try to tie FAE with IRS limits (now $285k) as a sort of COLA. Look at a flat dollar pension. As I mentioned earlier, we did get some targeted A fund gains in 2006. We’ve really only failed badly in 2015. Make retirement THE cornerstone issue. Very, very focused negotiation.
Why reinvent the wheel? Ditch the pancakes and let’s use tried and true pension ideas.
Well, the current A plan that you so much love was negotiated by the organization that would negotiate the new one also correct? So if you have no confidence in them negotiating pensions then why are you so certain about our current one?
As Kronan pointed out I think most of the language and funding levels are regulated like our current plan.
I dont care what direction we go but your arguments talk circles around themselves.
Whats Pancakes? We are earning pancakes in the current plan also arent we?
As for focused I agree. Hey at least we see eye to eye on that. It seems you have tunnel vision on this issue. Im willing to look at numerous ideas. Heck I would be interested in a Flat dollar formula (like UPS) if it was a big enough increase. So is the UPS pension “pancakes”? Is it not a pension? I know it a different calculation and formula so is it junk in your mind?