Anyone pushing for a DB now is essentially saying screw the younger guys because when the next recession hits, it'll be the first to go. But as long as you get yours, right? An increase in retirement benefits helps all pilots. A DB only helps senior pilots.

 

Ron,

Thank you for a cogent and well thought out post.

I need to correct one point though and that's the idea that I want a new DB. The answer to that is "it depends." Yes, I want to see some sort of retirement enhancement. What form that takes is debatable. I AM against those that will not open their minds to anything other than an increase in DC percentage.

Plus........I like being the devils advocate!

Denny

 

It's sold to use as a percentage, but it's costed by the company in Dollars. The percentage increase achievable in either case will be based on the same dollar amount, so the value of either will end up being the same. I'm telling you that it's not a choice between a 5% pay increase and 5% DC increase.

You have the extra 5% pay in the next contract cycle, but you are now CLOSER to the other company that leapfrogged you in pay. This is why the advantage is lost. We always compare our hourly pay to that at other airlines. If you add pay in other venues, our hourly pay is lower for the compensation we receive. Thus, when we "correct" to the hourly pay that the other airlines have (or better) we are given a larger increase. Soft money is always an advantage to the pilot group in negotiations for this reason. Hourly pay is the worst place for us to put money because that's how airlines are compared to each other. The more places we put money that is not pay, the more we are helped when other airlines raise their rates.

 

Understood. But this is such a potentially emotional/false hope infused can of worms that it could easily go off into the weeds and have us divided and negotiating with ourselves.

IMO its possible to maybe create a new program with the equivalent of a couple percent of what would have been additional DC or something like that. But the extent of what's being discussed leaves so much room for false possibilities, such as anything based off a peak period of time (best year etc) and that gets so emotionally intoxicating yet so unsustainable so quickly that IMO it will best case delay contractual improvements for years and worst case lead to scope sales and more "productivity" gains like wheel spin up for block time, longer training freezes, work rule/reroute relief/etc and nonsense like that to fund it.

I just don't see going down this long and winding road as benefitting the pilot group. Its not really even a Senior vs Junior issue, as there's zero chance of a retroactive restoration best year pump and dump system of ever being implemented anyway. Any additional program will clearly have to be based off of go forward costs and actuarials, so even if it looks like an traditional A fund/DB, it won't be anywhere near "restorative" in the sense that some may be thinking, and we'll probably have to chase our tails for quite a while to get it.

 

Wrong on so many accounts. Do you know how ERISA law works? A DB can only be terminated if it meets the criteria for termination. THAT is a pretty big hurdle. You do know that American tried (while in bankruptcy) and was denied.

An increase in DC helps all pilots but helps younger pilots more...as long as you get yours right?

A DB helps all pilots too. If a DB is terminated, you do realize it gets turned over to the PBGC. It doesn't just disappear. You just have to wait longer to get yours and with a millennial attitude like yours it's "screw the old guys." See I can name call and pigeon hole too. Why don't you try and a make a cogent argument without the drama.

Denny

 

You've never heard "pay your dues" in this type of reference before?

It's a reference to either saying that more junior pilots haven't been through enough to have a valid opinion, or whatever hardship they are going through shouldn't be fixed because it's "expected" or otherwise normal. At the regional level it was usually levied by senior pilots who either didn't want to change work rules that no longer affected them or wanted to give them up for pay with an explanation that you needed to "pay your dues" like they did (although with questioning you would usually find out for them it was for a month or two instead of years due to movement). It still happens occasionally at the mainline level, although not nearly as badly.

This is only a reference to "pay your dues" and not the rest of the post.

 

I’m quite confident that NONE of you ever thought your pension was going to be overturned in court either. And guess what? It was. Believe it or not Denny, I have sympathy for you all. To have the rug yanked out from your feet absolutely sucks, and I recognize that it had dire consequences for some.

So, with that knowledge, that our courts are wildly unpredictable, and the little guy doesn’t always win the fight, why, in my right mind, would I want to go down the same road? When my retirement picture is pretty solid in its current state, why would I want to waste negotiating capital on retirement? Our retirement as it stands today is quite terrific. Why would I not want to negotiate for better QOL, pay, and tightening up our porous scope language?

 

When you are talking about trading PS for a higher raise, I agree with you but in the instance we are talking about, we do not lose the advantage. We would be getting a 5% raise that will always be there regardless of what other companies do. And we would build on top of that.

Denny

 

Delta, however, wasn't. I don't think it's really relevant that another pilot group was able to hold onto it while we weren't. The point is that it has already happened in the past so there is definitely a level of uncertainty with it.

I already know where the "doesn't just disappear" phrase is going to go. You're going to get a response of "then why are we trying to get something back that didn't go away?"

Before you get caught up in me bringing that up, I don't have that attitude... but I don't really consider it as simple and friendly as "you just have to wait longer."

I've said this elsewhere, if we are going to make changes to the retirement plan with the idea of being "fair" to the deadzoners, then there needs to be something for those who already retired as well. There should not just be a cutoff where a pilot who retired one day gets nothing and another who retires the very next day gets restoration. Anything else is the same thing, except it's current deadzoners saying "I got mine, so screw the older guys."

I don't like the idea of a traditional DB plan for the very reason that it's been taken away before. I don't really care that American kept theirs or that it's difficult. The point is that it's possible and has already happened once, that's not something to plan retirement with when there will always be a cloud hanging over your head that it will go away.

 

First of all, thank you for a great response. Its appreciated.

You're retirement is looking pretty solid. That's great and I'm truly happy for you. One point. I assume this is based on the current 16%DC you are receiving now and will have over the next 25+ years? I'm not arguing about taking that away. I'm arguing to supplement that with a different avenue.

Of course you (and I) want to negotiate for better QOL, pay, and Scope. How about we do the retirement thing in addition to those items? After all, how many billions of dollars is the company making now!?!

Denny