Airline Pilot Central Forums - Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?

Interesting academic discussion but you guys are overlooking a giant elephant in the room. The PBGC and federal law under ERISA.
We have a terminated DB plan sitting out there. You can't just start up a new one covering the same employees. Highly illegal.
You can't even make the DC plans we have in place too generous for those eligible to receive PBGC benefits or you will run afoul of ERISA rules governing "substitute" plans.
The PBGC already winked and nodded and bent the rules to allow for the "ALPA Notes". They're not likely to be so lenient in the future.

acl65pilot

11-11-2009 07:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by siemprerojo (Post 710289)

Acl,
I just pm'd you with a question.
Thanks in advance.
Tim

Already sent a lengthily response......

acl65pilot

11-11-2009 07:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Check Essential (Post 710292)

I understand that completely, but to be successful we need to think outside the box.

IMHO much like the company, the PBGC is going to be looking for ways out of their mess. A payout may be the answer for our guys. It is worth our time to look at it. That is and was my point.

newKnow

11-11-2009 07:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by acl65pilot (Post 710274)

The idea of having an association administer a DB is an idea that I would be willing to look at. Others unions do it, and it works well for them. There does not seem to be a lot of support for that at this time, but it would offer similar protections that a DC does. The company would have to deposit X dollars per period per pilot, and we could then dole it out. A lot of work would have to be done to make it work.
With the level of distrust of ALPA it would be an uphill battle, but one I could see ALPA doing. It would make sense from a numbers stand point. It would be very hard for the pilots to vote ALPA off the property if they had their retirement tied up........

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomgoodman (Post 710279)

A third-party administrator such as a large bank or insurance company would avoid conflicts of interest that might arise if the union did it. Worst-case scenario would be a situation like the infamous Teamsters' Central States Pension Fund.

Thanks for considering the suggestion.

I'm just saying that with the system we have set up now, our senior pilots have the option to:

1. Retire and start drawing down on any money they have saved (hoping it will last) or,
2. Continue flying and make the same money they did last year (delaying the beginning of the draw down)

As we talk about future contract improvements, any improvement will make it easier for pilots to pick option #2. Not that I'm trying to get rid of anybody (ok, yes I am), but I don't want a system that pushes us to work until we can't work anymore because of illness or mandatory retirement age.

freightguy

11-11-2009 07:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Superpilot92 (Post 710287)

what if the 1700 isnt just based on new rules but also, upcoming retirements, increased flying, new airframes and the upcoming need to DH pilots alot more?

Good point. Post SOC, we will be less 'fat-staffed' with all the base movements, DHs, virtual basings, training cycles etc. Add to that the new FAA rest rules. Any retirements, early outs and new planes will be gravy.

newKnow

11-11-2009 08:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Check Essential (Post 710292)

Hey. You said ERISA. +10 points for you because most people don't know what it is. So, I'm all ears. From what you're saying, it seems as though the retirement picture for DAL pilots is pretty strapped and will have maximum limits. What do you think can be done to get around this?

I'm with ACL on thinking outside the box and knowledgeable people like you are prime candidates for such thinking.

New K Now

tsquare

11-11-2009 08:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Superpilot92 (Post 710040)

I believe enough has been given up already hasnt it??? :confused:

You beat me to it...

Go UT... both of 'em :D

acl65pilot

11-11-2009 08:08 AM

If I was thinking on myself only, I would just prefer more DC money. I would love to max that sucker out each year. My projections have me retiring with more cash than a DB would ever give me! (By a few million BTW)

Again, I am only 35 so my sight picture if a lot different than 85% of our group and I know that.

CVG767A

11-11-2009 08:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by newKnow (Post 710304)

As we talk about future contract improvements, any improvement will make it easier for pilots to pick option #2. Not that I'm trying to get rid of anybody (ok, yes I am), but I don't want a system that pushes us to work until we can't work anymore because of illness or mandatory retirement age.

To tag onto this concept, we need to keep the ability to drop our schedule as low as we want with no penalty. I think a lot of guys, as they get older, will want to semi-retire by flying a couple of short trips per month. This will benefit everyone, as the manning for wide-body left seats will need to be higher.

I know that's what I hope to do when I get to that age...

acl65pilot

11-11-2009 08:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CVG767A (Post 710316)

How about partial month schedule where you bid one or two trips, and allow the remainder of your possible schedule to go to the next guy who is slightly junior to you.

I personally do not like where a senior guy can be slightly retired and see what the fruits of seniority have given him, only to drop it in the pot so junior guys can pick it up. It should be taken out of your PCS run and given to guys in the initial run!

I am junior too, and your idea works better for me, but not for the group as a whole

Thoughts?

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:45 PM.

Page 1751 of 20174