I am not a finance and retirement expert, nor am I a math(s) guru; But a little googling brought me to some other resources available on the subject of variable benefit vs defined benefit pension plans.... and yes, despite whatever the union is calling the current FART proposal it looks to me like the industry as a whole does call it a “variable benefit” plan.

The question that I still have is if, according to ALPA, there truly is a minimum floor to the benefit that is equal (no less than) to what we would receive with this current plan, how does it in any way help the company and why would they want it? Wouldn’t their funding burden remain unchanged in that case? I understand from reading that not many companies (maybe none?) that have these plans also have a floor... so that could make us somewhat unique.

And also, if this is so good for us why is it so difficult to understand? I understand all my other investing. This one... remains rather murky to me.

I do get some of the advantages to bearing the investment risk, similar to a 401k. The ability to control the investments, the portability (can’t be taken away in the event of company bankruptcy, etc) but I remain very, very skeptical.