Originally Posted by dodgerk (Post 2665113)

I also would have appreciated a little more flexibility. Hopefully the comments I made in the blank space at the end were enough to get my points of view across.

Originally Posted by Trip7 (Post 2665165)

*Begin survey*

Increase DC to 20%

Provide optional investment vehicles/education for use of DC Excess Cash

*End survey*

Originally Posted by LeineLodge (Post 2665217)

^^^This

They must not be getting the answers they want to the retirement question, so they KEEP ASKING

*hint - we don’t want a pension or any other annuity promise setup. No roadshow circuit or leading phone/internet polling is going to change that

Hit 20% then move on to QOL items like higher daily credit for VAC/Training, more vacation accrual, paid APD, more IVDs/IVD flexibility, improved Bank options for deposit/withdrawal, DH language, RES GS noop protection, etc.

Lots of things we can shoot for. A pension is not what the pilots want

Originally Posted by hockeypilot44 (Post 2665305)

Guys on the way out want a pension and guaranteed income at the expense of the rest of the contract (which means at the expense of the younger pilots.) I’ve said it on here before. I put on my survey that I don’t even want touch the retirement section.

Originally Posted by LeineLodge (Post 2665217)

^^^This

They must not be getting the answers they want to the retirement question, so they KEEP ASKING

*hint - we don’t want a pension or any other annuity promise setup. No roadshow circuit or leading phone/internet polling is going to change that

Hit 20% then move on to QOL items like higher daily credit for VAC/Training, more vacation accrual, paid APD, more IVDs/IVD flexibility, improved Bank options for deposit/withdrawal, DH language, RES GS noop protection, etc.

Lots of things we can shoot for. A pension is not what the pilots want

Originally Posted by Denny Crane (Post 2665361)

Just. Not. True. Hint: There is a significant population of pilots that DO want some kind of retirement fix.

Denny

Originally Posted by Denny Crane (Post 2665361)

Just. Not. True. Hint: There is a significant population of pilots that DO want some kind of retirement fix.

Denny

Originally Posted by Trip7 (Post 2665409)

Easy fix

20% DC

Invest your DC Excess Cash as you see fit.

Originally Posted by Hank Kingsley (Post 2665333)

...Mandatory retirement parties with ponies and strippers, at your expense.

Originally Posted by LeineLodge (Post 2665217)

^^^This

They must not be getting the answers they want to the retirement question, so they KEEP ASKING

*hint - we don’t want a pension or any other annuity promise setup. No roadshow circuit or leading phone/internet polling is going to change that

Hit 20% then move on to QOL items like higher daily credit for VAC/Training, more vacation accrual, paid APD, more IVDs/IVD flexibility, improved Bank options for deposit/withdrawal, DH language, RES GS noop protection, etc.

Lots of things we can shoot for. A pension is not what the pilots want

Originally Posted by Scoop (Post 2665390)

Maybe, but what is a "significant population" in your opinion?

My response was to counter his claim/hint that no-one wants anything but more DC. That is flat out wrong. A significant population I think is 40 percentish.

I am 55 and would love to see the retirement improved but each year we hire 1000 younger guys and over 500 older guys retire. If the MEC thinks they can wait for the perfect contract they will lose their chance at this via simple attrition. Every year the percentage of Pilots who prioritize retirement decreases.

No argument here.

The only way retirement will be addressed is if we get a quick TA but that is all but impossible since the more militant Pilots seem to have the ear of the MEC. Nothing wrong with being aggressive and we have certainly had our share of pusillanimous union folks, think TA-1, but you have to choose your battles wisely.

I think we have some time to negotiate. By taking the attitude that we need a quick TA for this to happen, you are painting the NC into a box.

We lost this battle back when we agreed to LOA 51 - not to challenge the pension termination. I voted against that LOA but my side lost. I moved on. If we could not muster enough guys to hold the line at a pension when 100% of the Pilots cared about pension how can we convince guys to fight for it now? And why should the younger guys take up a cause that we refused to engage in 14 years ago?

I'm not necessarily advocating a new DB. Scoop, come on, do you not remember we were in the throes of bankruptcy and all that entailed? Our pension was going away no matter what we did. I firmly believe this to be true.


Like I said, I am for improving the pension but I just don't see it happening as any sort of DB type income stream. We have tons of leverage but guess what? To use leverage you have to be willing to trade it for something. As long as a very vocal minority keep insisting that we can get to a TA with zero concessions we will get only two things: Jack and Squat. :eek:

We will never get a deal if there is not negotiation.

The sad part is the guys yelling the loudest for retirement for the most part are the same guys insisting that will vote no for any TA with even a single concession. I realize most of this is bluster, but they have effectively boxed our MEC into a corner making the very thing they desire less likely to occur.


Scoop

Originally Posted by Trip7 (Post 2665409)

Easy fix

20% DC

Invest your DC Excess Cash as you see fit.

Originally Posted by Denny Crane (Post 2665530)

Thirty-five percent (+1.95%) gone to income tax. You don't see a problem with that?

Denny

Originally Posted by Denny Crane (Post 2665528)

If our MEC is weak willed enough to allow that vocal minority group to influence negotiations to that extent, then they shouldn't be our MEC.

I've been lurking on CC and there is a thread there started by the SLC Capt Rep. I've been encouraged by his attitude in it and hope he is reelected (especially considering who is running against him).

Denny

Originally Posted by Trip7 (Post 2665537)

No.

Pay the taxes.

Invest the excess cash into tax efficient asset classes. Preferably ones that produce a K1.

Originally Posted by Scoop (Post 2665538)

Denny,


I hope that you are correct - I tend to be more pessimistic about the whole pension issue. OBTW - I am in no hurry to get a deal - as long as it takes to get a good deal, but the longer it takes............................. Well, you know where I am going with this.



Thanks for the civil discussion as always.



Scoop :)

Originally Posted by TurbineDriver (Post 2665565)

I’m amazed the union keeps asking all these pension questions! Hello! Nobody wants one!!!

Hello! You are wrong!

Did anyone else look at medical coverage of the other airlines in contract comparison? Our premiums and deductibles are WAY higher than everyone else.

Agreed.

How about 20% DC contribution, improvements to medical (lower premiums and lower deductibles) and forget the idea of a pension. The union has lost what the pilot group wants in a big way. Everyone please fill out the survey!

Originally Posted by Planetrain (Post 2665416)

Not directed necessarily at you trip, but what is the preoccupation with 20% DC? (Or any DC increase?) An equivalent raise accomplishes the same thing and more.

A 4% raise plus a 4% DC increase is worth less than an 8% straight raise.

Originally Posted by Denny Crane (Post 2665570)

As someone mentioned in another thread, that extra 5% would mean more money in your pocket if it was in a 9% pay raise instead of a 4% raise and 5% more DC. I’d rather take it in a raise.

Forget the 20% DC and lets go with a new DB... See, I can play that game too!;) I do agree with your desire for improvements to medical. I would carry it further to include Medicare supplemental insurance after turning 65......dare I say retirement medical....

Yes, please everyone take the survey.

Denny

Originally Posted by Denny Crane (Post 2665562)

Agree to disagree.

I would prefer to have multiple income streams in retirement.

Denny

Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp (Post 2665589)

Let’s make medical contributions and deductibles less stupid while we’re going that route, Trip.

Originally Posted by LeineLodge (Post 2665598)

Multiple income streams? Great! Use your excess DC to fund investments that produce them - in your own name, under your control. It could be as simple as a dividend producing index fund in a brokerage account. You don’t have to go all crazy and become a slumlord.

But for sure, find one that gets a good return for $ invested. IMO annuities do not qualify.

Pensions fall even lower on the scale of places I want “my” money (it’s not yours, but you already learned that lesson once). Whatever it is, it’s always better to have it under your control and not a promise from Delta.

My point was not to restart this conversation, since we all know where we stand. The point is the MEC keeps asking the same question which means they must not be getting the answer they want to support Bartells’ land grab. They’ll keep asking apparently until they find a way to justify it, which others on this thread have rightly pointed out will likely result in a drawn out stalemate while more “deadZoners” retire.

Don’t worry though, Jerry will be along soon to tell us all how the ponies and 5 years of full retro are achievable with zero concessions. Cause don’t you know, this MEC is a well oiled machine!?!

Oh, and yes to healthcare improvement. I’d even support some retiree healthcare provisions and that would be less likely to vanish, just so you don’t think I’m an a$$ that doesn’t care about you or other pilots approaching retirement.

Originally Posted by Trip7 (Post 2665165)

*Begin survey*

Increase DC to 20%

Provide optional investment vehicles/education for use of DC Excess Cash

*End survey*

Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp (Post 2665589)

Let’s make medical contributions and deductibles less stupid while we’re going that route, Trip.

Originally Posted by LeineLodge (Post 2665598)

Multiple income streams? Great! Use your excess DC to fund investments that produce them - in your own name, under your control. It could be as simple as a dividend producing index fund in a brokerage account. You don’t have to go all crazy and become a slumlord.

But for sure, find one that gets a good return for $ invested. IMO annuities do not qualify.

Pensions fall even lower on the scale of places I want “my” money (it’s not yours, but you already learned that lesson once). Whatever it is, it’s always better to have it under your control and not a promise from Delta.

My point was not to restart this conversation, since we all know where we stand. The point is the MEC keeps asking the same question which means they must not be getting the answer they want to support Bartells’ land grab. They’ll keep asking apparently until they find a way to justify it, which others on this thread have rightly pointed out will likely result in a drawn out stalemate while more “deadZoners” retire.

Don’t worry though, Jerry will be along soon to tell us all how the ponies and 5 years of full retro are achievable with zero concessions. Cause don’t you know, this MEC is a well oiled machine!?!

Oh, and yes to healthcare improvement. I’d even support some retiree healthcare provisions and that would be less likely to vanish, just so you don’t think I’m an a$$ that doesn’t care about you or other pilots approaching retirement.

Originally Posted by LeineLodge (Post 2665598)

Multiple income streams? Great! Use your excess DC to fund investments that produce them - in your own name, under your control. It could be as simple as a dividend producing index fund in a brokerage account. You don’t have to go all crazy and become a slumlord.

But for sure, find one that gets a good return for $ invested. IMO annuities do not qualify.

Pensions fall even lower on the scale of places I want “my” money (it’s not yours, but you already learned that lesson once). Whatever it is, it’s always better to have it under your control and not a promise from Delta.



My point was not to restart this conversation, since we all know where we stand. The point is the MEC keeps asking the same question which means they must not be getting the answer they want to support Bartells’ land grab. They’ll keep asking apparently until they find a way to justify it, which others on this thread have rightly pointed out will likely result in a drawn out stalemate while more “deadZoners” retire.

Don’t worry though, Jerry will be along soon to tell us all how the ponies and 5 years of full retro are achievable with zero concessions. Cause don’t you know, this MEC is a well oiled machine!?!

Oh, and yes to healthcare improvement. I’d even support some retiree healthcare provisions and that would be less likely to vanish, just so you don’t think I’m an a$$ that doesn’t care about you or other pilots approaching retirement.

Originally Posted by LeineLodge (Post 2665604)

Totally agree with this. More tax free (sheltered) money could be found by having the company contribute to IRS max’s into the HSA - this would offset the “high deductible” requirement of these accounts.

For those that don’t opt for the HSA, or can’t due to TriCare, provide a plussed up (similar to DPMA excess) equivalent benefit.

Also, take Per Diem to the IRS max per location and any other tax advantaged angle we can find. With less pilots itemizing due to the new tax setup, in 2018 and beyond, this becomes even more valuable.

Originally Posted by LeineLodge (Post 2665598)

Multiple income streams? Great! Use your excess DC to fund investments that produce them - in your own name, under your control. It could be as simple as a dividend producing index fund in a brokerage account. You don’t have to go all crazy and become a slumlord.

But for sure, find one that gets a good return for $ invested. IMO annuities do not qualify.

Pensions fall even lower on the scale of places I want “my” money (it’s not yours, but you already learned that lesson once). Whatever it is, it’s always better to have it under your control and not a promise from Delta.

My point was not to restart this conversation, since we all know where we stand. The point is the MEC keeps asking the same question which means they must not be getting the answer they want to support Bartells’ land grab. They’ll keep asking apparently until they find a way to justify it, which others on this thread have rightly pointed out will likely result in a drawn out stalemate while more “deadZoners” retire.

Don’t worry though, Jerry will be along soon to tell us all how the ponies and 5 years of full retro are achievable with zero concessions. Cause don’t you know, this MEC is a well oiled machine!?!

Oh, and yes to healthcare improvement. I’d even support some retiree healthcare provisions and that would be less likely to vanish, just so you don’t think I’m an a$$ that doesn’t care about you or other pilots approaching retirement.

Originally Posted by RonRicco (Post 2665746)

Based on this survey and the polling questions I participated in, there is ZERO doubt they are pushing for a certain outcome.

After actually being involved in legitimate polling, I can tell you one thing... These guys are going to have their hands full at the table unless they do a lot of follow up polling that narrows the priorities. (Exclusive of the DB/DC issue)

Right now I bet 90 percent of the questions are being answered “extremely important.” When they start having to make a choice at the table of what is, or is not achievable, they are going to need to know what the real priorities of the pilot group are.

Better strap in, cause we are in for a long, long ride if this negotiaion hinges on a DB. Why? It is already a polarizing topic and I am afraid if a DB is part of the “as long as it takes” issue, we will not have the unity that is needed to push forward.

Originally Posted by Baradium (Post 2665592)

I actually have a couple reasons it could be advantageous to have the money in DB.

First, the increase is likely going to be based on a monetary value, not a percentage. So you aren't going to see a larger increase by having the percentages all in a raise.

Huh? Not understanding this comment. Every raise we have gotten in the past has been a percentage. That is what we are taking about.......is a 5% hourly raise worth more or less than a 5% DC increase? I don’t understand your logic.

Secondly, contract comparison is normally done using the base hourly pay rates.

Just like previous discussions involving the profit sharing advantage going away after one contract cycle once combined into rates, the same thing would happen here. The more places we put money that are not in the base pay rates, the easier it will be to keep the advantage in upcoming contract cycles as other airlines increase their base pay.

Originally Posted by hockeypilot44 (Post 2665305)

Guys on the way out want a pension and guaranteed income at the expense of the rest of the contract (which means at the expense of the younger pilots.) I’ve said it on here before. I put on my survey that I don’t even want touch the retirement section.