mikea72580

After stirring a rather large hornets nest with Minimum Balances and making promises of fresh polling on Retirement Proposals, the latest telephone polling asks no questions about Minimum Balances, neither specific nor general.
For a supposedly pilot driven negotiation is anyone else starting to wonder who’s direction they’re following?

Der Meister

Why ask a question about something that has not even been approved by the FED/IRS? I don't know why we are even fighting for something that isn't even approved yet. If we want to ask for it, ALPA national needs to lobby for it first and get it approved. Once its approved by the FED/IRS I'm fine spending time on negotiating for it. Untill it's approved we are spending our time negotiating on pipe dreams. Just like age 67, which is an act of Congress it's just simply not going to happen quickly...

mikea72580

Good point. However, Negotiators Notepad 19-09 revealed that we are actively negotiating for this benefit RIGHT NOW. So, it begs the question, should we be? Polling is how you find the answer. Why is it being left out?

Bucking Bar

For the same reason no questions were asked about surrendering profit sharing in C15.

Politically driven surveys have been the bane of our representational existence more than once.

So far, none of my FO's have been fans of the minimum balance. There are more FO's than Captains at this airline. We will have at least one round of political churn before anything gets done. I'm forecasting C2023, maybe 2024.

Big E 757

The plan is approved and is in use in certain professions. What isn’t approved is the “optional” part. We can’t/ won’t get any kind of approval from the IRS in time. It would require a change in the IRS tax laws. What they’ll do, mark my words, is get it into the contract, and then apologize that they couldn’t make it optional. Oops. It was more difficult than they planned, but they’ll continue working with the IRS and by next contract, they’ll have changed the regs and it’ll be optional at some point in the future, so agree with it now and in a few short years, you’ll be able to opt out. It’s the vote for it now, we will fix it later program. If it makes it in at all. I’m feeling the wool being pulled over my eyes on this one. They’re downplaying it’s significance right now, which makes my cynical self think this is how it’ll shake out.

bugman61

I hope everyone that is doing the mega back door roth enjoys it while they can! It’s going to be a real kick in the nuts when all their DPSP cash gets put into a fund with a 5% return and a “nominal” balance in their name. “Sorry guys, we can’t get the irs to change it this next year. Why throw the baby out with the bath water?”

notEnuf

Yup, VEBA all over again. That would be an easy no regardless of the other sections

Gunfighter

As much as I dislike the plus up. This my biggest reason for opposing the plan. I'm not confident in the optional nature being presented. I do not want my DPSP Cash hijacked by DAPLA. It's my money, I want it in my name, under my direct control. This plan is heading full throttle down a path that takes away individual control.

crewdawg

I'd venture to guess that many guys who use the mega back door roth are not keeping it in their DPSP.

Denny Crane

It is not a VEBA . The biggest hit against the VEBA was it was not estateable. The MBCBP is. You can argue that the return isn't what you want or you want it to be optional etc. But trying to instill fear by saying it's the same as a VEBA is a stretch.

Denny