|
Originally Posted by Freightpuppy
(Post 108181)
I agree. I was thinking as far as them just being able to go back to captain on a whim and bumping us down without a vacancy. ....If this happened, do you think most of them would do this or do you think some would say screw it and just stay FEs?
I think that the confusion over people re-upgrading came from the legal amendments offered to the senate in the past which say nobody can come back. I don't believe that they prohibited re-upgrading. It wouldn't entirly suprise me to see companies, including ours, try to buy people off from upgrading with some sort of an early retirement package. The impending doom of the 727 is really going to throw things off. What will happen to those 60+ year olds? When there seats go away, are they fired or furloughed? At United they were fired (retired) but that may have been because all of the three man airplanes were parked at once. Given the chance, I can't imagine that one guy eleigable for the left seat would stay in the back seat at any price. |
Originally Posted by 767pilot
(Post 108299)
It wouldn't entirly suprise me to see companies, including ours, try to buy people off from upgrading with some sort of an early retirement package. The impending doom of the 727 is really going to throw things off. . |
I know what you mean, and I am happy to spend their money, but I just don't think that they would spend enough to make it worth it. Your talking about an amount that would be worth a guy passing up over a hundred thousand dollars a year in raise, additional retirement benefits, and the ability to leave your current nest egg alone and let it mature for 5 more years. The figure would have to be pretty huge.
If it's any consolation to any of us, whatever happens will be totally out of our control. |
Yes, but preventing the change itself is still (theoretically) in your control (whic means OUR control).
The big thing for you UPS guys (and any American, FedEx or other guys with a B-Fund) is that if the retirement age goes to 65 you can kiss your B-fund good-bye. I would expect the IRS to freeze B-fund contributions as soon as the new rule goes into effect. So the old guy getting a 5-year extension gets no penalty, but the 32-year-old new hire gets (depending on the company) over $1 million taken away from him with the "promise" being able to work 5 more years. Wow - what a ****ty deal. This is the crux of the problem - even worse than reinstatements. If the B-funds go away because of this, it will be the biggest theft of income from one group to another in the history of the industry. The old guys will get the benefit of their B-fund for their entire career, and then watch as it is eliminated for the young guys. Can you make up 25 years of B-fund contributions and growth with an additional 5 years (maybe) in your highest seat? I don't think so, and I'm mad as hell because of it. Unless there is a specific provision to allow B-Funds to continue, every pilot under 50 should be opposed to this change. |
Originally Posted by pilot141
(Post 108537)
Yes, but preventing the change itself is still (theoretically) in your control (whic means OUR control).
The big thing for you UPS guys (and any American, FedEx or other guys with a B-Fund) is that if the retirement age goes to 65 you can kiss your B-fund good-bye. I would expect the IRS to freeze B-fund contributions as soon as the new rule goes into effect. So the old guy getting a 5-year extension gets no penalty, but the 32-year-old new hire gets (depending on the company) over $1 million taken away from him with the "promise" being able to work 5 more years. Wow - what a ****ty deal. This is the crux of the problem - even worse than reinstatements. If the B-funds go away because of this, it will be the biggest theft of income from one group to another in the history of the industry. The old guys will get the benefit of their B-fund for their entire career, and then watch as it is eliminated for the young guys. Can you make up 25 years of B-fund contributions and growth with an additional 5 years (maybe) in your highest seat? I don't think so, and I'm mad as hell because of it. Unless there is a specific provision to allow B-Funds to continue, every pilot under 50 should be opposed to this change. fbh |
Originally Posted by pilot141
(Post 108537)
Yes, but preventing the change itself is still (theoretically) in your control (whic means OUR control).
The big thing for you UPS guys (and any American, FedEx or other guys with a B-Fund) is that if the retirement age goes to 65 you can kiss your B-fund good-bye. I would expect the IRS to freeze B-fund contributions as soon as the new rule goes into effect. So the old guy getting a 5-year extension gets no penalty, but the 32-year-old new hire gets (depending on the company) over $1 million taken away from him with the "promise" being able to work 5 more years. Wow - what a ****ty deal. This is the crux of the problem - even worse than reinstatements. If the B-funds go away because of this, it will be the biggest theft of income from one group to another in the history of the industry. The old guys will get the benefit of their B-fund for their entire career, and then watch as it is eliminated for the young guys. Can you make up 25 years of B-fund contributions and growth with an additional 5 years (maybe) in your highest seat? I don't think so, and I'm mad as hell because of it. Unless there is a specific provision to allow B-Funds to continue, every pilot under 50 should be opposed to this change. |
Lil J, I think that's what he is saying. I am lost though as to why the B fund would go away if the 65 thing passed.
|
Originally Posted by pilot141
(Post 108537)
Yes, but preventing the change itself is still (theoretically) in your control (whic means OUR control).
The big thing for you UPS guys (and any American, FedEx or other guys with a B-Fund) is that if the retirement age goes to 65 you can kiss your B-fund good-bye. I would expect the IRS to freeze B-fund contributions as soon as the new rule goes into effect. So the old guy getting a 5-year extension gets no penalty, but the 32-year-old new hire gets (depending on the company) over $1 million taken away from him with the "promise" being able to work 5 more years. Wow - what a ****ty deal. This is the crux of the problem - even worse than reinstatements. If the B-funds go away because of this, it will be the biggest theft of income from one group to another in the history of the industry. The old guys will get the benefit of their B-fund for their entire career, and then watch as it is eliminated for the young guys. Can you make up 25 years of B-fund contributions and growth with an additional 5 years (maybe) in your highest seat? I don't think so, and I'm mad as hell because of it. Unless there is a specific provision to allow B-Funds to continue, every pilot under 50 should be opposed to this change. |
Originally Posted by pilot141
(Post 108537)
Yes, but preventing the change itself is still (theoretically) in your control (whic means OUR control).
The big thing for you UPS guys (and any American, FedEx or other guys with a B-Fund) is that if the retirement age goes to 65 you can kiss your B-fund good-bye. I would expect the IRS to freeze B-fund contributions as soon as the new rule goes into effect. So the old guy getting a 5-year extension gets no penalty, but the 32-year-old new hire gets (depending on the company) over $1 million taken away from him with the "promise" being able to work 5 more years. Wow - what a ****ty deal. This is the crux of the problem - even worse than reinstatements. If the B-funds go away because of this, it will be the biggest theft of income from one group to another in the history of the industry. The old guys will get the benefit of their B-fund for their entire career, and then watch as it is eliminated for the young guys. Can you make up 25 years of B-fund contributions and growth with an additional 5 years (maybe) in your highest seat? I don't think so, and I'm mad as hell because of it. Unless there is a specific provision to allow B-Funds to continue, every pilot under 50 should be opposed to this change. I would think it would be exactly the opposite. I can see the 60+ guys getting their B-Fund contributions frozen, but no way will the B-Fund "go away" for everyone else. Will they stop us from contributing to our 401Ks too. I think not. My understanding is that at AA there is already a plan in place to have the over 60 guys retire and then continue on as "contractors" on a cash only basis past that point. Kind of like what Delta did for a while with early retirements. I'm not sure what Brown has decided to do but I heard it was in the new contract. The B-Fund isn't going away! |
Originally Posted by dfwdavi8r
(Post 108570)
I would think it would be exactly the opposite. I can see the 60+ guys getting their B-Fund contributions frozen, but no way will the B-Fund "go away" for everyone else. Will they stop us from contributing to our 401Ks too. I think not.
My understanding is that at AA there is already a plan in place to have the over 60 guys retire and then continue on as "contractors" on a cash only basis past that point. Kind of like what Delta did for a while with early retirements. I'm not sure what Brown has decided to do but I heard it was in the new contract. The B-Fund isn't going away! |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:41 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands