Originally Posted by BlueSkies

Anyways, why don't you ask a couple of your friends in the 'crosshairs of the Min Balance' what they need dollar wise to make their retirement work? And I'm not asking sarcastically, I am actually curious.

Originally Posted by scrmhalf

.
First time in airline history that new hires have a pension worth 10times that of a DZer

Originally Posted by scrmhalf

You are dead wrong. The DZer has a
small DB. The Follow on DC was 5% tied to BK wages. The 16% DC didn’t hit until 2016 along with better wages. No time to build a 401K even close to anyone hired post BK.
First time in airline history that new hires have a pension worth 10times that of a DZer
And
Don’t forget, the merger hurt a certain group and set
Them back 1000s of seniority numbers

Originally Posted by CBreezy

Holy mathless troll post batman. 10X? That isn't even remotely reality.

Originally Posted by Herkflyr

I fixed it for you. Let's get real. There are NO "deadzoners" left. They have all long left the property and the term ought to be retired.

For those (many of you now) wondering precisely what does "deadzoner" mean? Well, originally, it stretched all the way back to 2004/05 timeframe, when the pension was still there, but we all could see that it was on its last breath. Due to the nature of our then-intact pension (and still current Age 60 rule), so long as you were at least 50, you could retire, and take half the actuarial value of your predicted pension payments in a lump sum. If you retired early there was a hit of course. On the one end were some guys who panicked and retired early at 51 who got $400K in a lump sum (years later they could have made that in one year as senior widebody A, but who could predict the future) and that was it. On the other end were guys like a jumpseater we had once, 58 years old and about to get a 1.5 mil lump sum. Both those were outlier examples, and most early retirees, who took the lump sum while they could, got some amount between the two.

A "deadzoner" was a pilot, usually in his late 40s or perhaps early 50s, who was either ineligible to take early retirement at all (not yet 50) or if he was, it would have been greatly reduced due to taking it at a young age in the early 50s. So....not quite enough years on the property to avail himself of any decent retirement/lump sum, but also someone who had built up enough years with the company to both start anticipating a nice traditional pension based on years of loyal service, and also someone close enough to retirement that a healthy 16% DC fund like we have now (and it wasn't even 16% post BK for years) wouldn't have enough years to accrue significant assets to make up for the loss of the anticipated traditional pension--so back then we truly DID have "deadzoners."

We don't have any now. ANY pilot left claiming to be a "deadzoner" is merely appropriating the term to mean...whatever it is he wants it to mean. Anyone who was a captain in the early 2000s is surely a senior widebody A by now, and likely has been for a long time. Not exactly my definition of a deadzoner as they originally were.

Originally Posted by Wolf424

I’d say we need to see an AIP before making a judgement on this. A lot of speculation and unknown.

The NN said we would have the best vacation section across all the passenger carriers. Considering UA tops out at 6 weeks…I’d say it means the senior pilots will get something out of this.

Especially if vacation pay more…perhaps equal across all vacation weeks. That’s an immediate benefit to everyone, but benefits more senior pilots in the short term. That’s hardly “squat”.

Originally Posted by TED74

In my experience, no one will answer this question with any actual financial data. If you can find one or two who WILL throw out some actual numbers, there still won’t be enough to develop any statistically relevant trend lines.

It’s pretty tough to garner any sympathy when you are unwilling to detail the circumstances.

Originally Posted by hockeypilot44

I’m going on a decade and a half as a commuting narrow-body fo. I can’t afford to miss weeekends and holidays with my kids so I can’t upgrade. People like me are the reason the upgrade has gone so junior. When the list stops moving (and it will), we’re going to see stagnation for a long time. The retirments settle way down in about

Originally Posted by Scoop

Please re-read my post. The "squat" that I was referring to was the specifically accelerated vacation accrual schedule - which is why it was highlighted.

Scoop