Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Cargo > FedEx
Fedex Pilots proposed retirement plan >

Fedex Pilots proposed retirement plan

Notices

Fedex Pilots proposed retirement plan

Old 07-25-2017, 04:23 AM
  #111  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,173
Default

Originally Posted by TonyC View Post
I can vouch that he's not a troll, not a cubicle commando -- he's one of us.


Just an odd one of us.






.
You make a habit of writing PhD dissertation length screeds on an Internet forum. I suppose some people still actually read them, but I think you might be a little out of the mainstream yourself.
Rock is offline  
Old 07-25-2017, 08:18 AM
  #112  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2016
Posts: 936
Default

Originally Posted by Chainsaw View Post
You can go back to your cubicle now and work on your end of year bonus calculations.....
So you don't think anyone with over 25 YOS wants more? Probably because you don't think there is a selfish bone in their bodies.
Fdxlag2 is offline  
Old 07-25-2017, 10:20 PM
  #113  
Organizational Learning 
 
TonyC's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: Directly behind the combiner
Posts: 4,948
Default

Originally Posted by Rock View Post

You make a habit of writing PhD dissertation length screeds on an Internet forum. I suppose some people still actually read them, but I think you might be a little out of the mainstream yourself.

It's tough being a screed writer in a sound bite world.


But you're right, I'm probably on the fringe of some bell curve.


Was that short enough?






.
TonyC is offline  
Old 07-26-2017, 06:50 AM
  #114  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,173
Default

Originally Posted by TonyC View Post
It's tough being a screed writer in a sound bite world.


But you're right, I'm probably on the fringe of some bell curve.


Was that short enough?






.
I defer to Walrus to make the judgement on brevity. But I did actually read all of your post this time. 😉
Rock is offline  
Old 07-26-2017, 07:49 PM
  #115  
Gets Weekends Off
 
kronan's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: 757 Capt
Posts: 2,418
Default

Don't hit APC as often as I used to

So, yes TonyC, did conflate PSIT and SIG. From the outsider's perspective they are part and parcel. And a significantly less adversarial working relationship with the company as compared to our grievance folks. Certainly that convivial relationship was part of the decision making in adopting the Bridge TA. Also, IMO-the mindset of the company shifted FY 13 timeframe from a we want to work with you to a we really want to minimize costs...so, mgt bargaining philosophy shifted accordingly. Sacrificed any good will they might have accrued by living up to their "promises" after we adopted CBA2011. But then again, as I understand it, if FS had lived up to his "promises" we might\might not be Unionized. But, FedEx grew into a F500 company and as more bean counters\lawyers get involved We became a Cost Center to be minimized versus folks to hang out with at a Folk Dancing establishment during the HUB turn.

Need to really reflect on Blue's numbers. It's a pretty good WAG at what going to a straight B plan would need to replace compared to our current A plan\B plan combo.

Yes, in 30 years 130k will buy signifcantly less than it does so today. (Decent ROT is Rule of 72..eg 2% means doubles\halfs in 36 years. 4% inflation\return 18, und so weiter)
Still, way better off because inflation will have the same impact on the B plan.
Yes, if you die a year after retirement a larger B plan will benefit your heirs more than our combo plan does. But if your big concern is leaving $$ for your heirs, buying a 25 year term life insurance policy at 45 or 50 or 40 depending upon what you think your lifespan will be can do the same thing. And much cheaper than getting rid of the A plan in exchange for a 16% B plan which will in no way come close to the compensation we receive with our 130k A plan and 8/9% B plan.

And the 130 makes some assumptions that mgt will never change it. Quite possible that CBA 2026-7 it will be cheaper for mgt to up the cap versus upping the B plan.

And, the other assumption on B plans is that Tax laws won't change. There are already the occasional grumbles that it's not fair that high income employees can defer taxes in a 401k, so goodness knows what the future holds on deferred compensation caps.
And another assumption is that we will be succesful in modifying a Big B plan to still be funded should we go out on disability.
Currently B plan contributions stop once the music stops...but longevity continues to accrue for our A plan.

UPS pension--they didn't get a "bump". Just upped the Fixed component of their A plan math. Still at 1%...or, the equivalent of a 126k pension at 30 years of service. Only work for 25=105k pension. Never make it to Capt and you get like 75% of that (don't quote me, didn't look up the FO numbers)

And maybe going to a Fixed calculation would help us sidestep some of the funding issues. I certainly don't know, but I would hope we've reached out to UPS and offered up our lessons learned in exchange for thiers.

Big desired outcome of our next full up CBA negotiations for me is an improved B plan. Right now there are quite a few people on property who don't have an 8% B plan, and aren't going to have a 9% one in the not too distant future. So need to get it into the cash over cap calculation. And needs to continue being funded if on disability
kronan is offline  
Old 07-26-2017, 10:06 PM
  #116  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Aug 2012
Posts: 711
Default

I agree that the disability issue is often overlooked when some folks talk about increased B plan percentages and/or cash over cap.

If you wouldn't go without health or life insurance, then fixing the B plan to protect those on disability is a key component that must not be overlooked.
Raptor is offline  
Old 07-27-2017, 07:52 AM
  #117  
Gets Weekends Off
 
HIFLYR's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2007
Position: 777 Captain in Training
Posts: 1,457
Default

As I think Kronan is saying a large part of the crew force did not get a B-fund increase due to the cap.
HIFLYR is offline  
Old 07-27-2017, 08:37 AM
  #118  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: leaning to the left
Posts: 4,184
Default

Originally Posted by HIFLYR View Post
As I think Kronan is saying a large part of the crew force did not get a B-fund increase due to the cap.
8% of a cap is more than 7% of a cap.

But, it's true that many people are not really getting 8% of their earnings.
Busboy is offline  
Old 07-27-2017, 10:18 AM
  #119  
Gets Weekends Off
 
DLax85's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Gear Monkey
Posts: 3,189
Default

Originally Posted by Busboy View Post
8% of a cap is more than 7% of a cap.

But, it's true that many people are not really getting 8% of their earnings.
In other words, Everyone received a 14.28% increase in their annual B fund contributions

IMHO, that was not sufficient, so I voted NO -- but it's still true
DLax85 is offline  
Old 07-27-2017, 10:30 AM
  #120  
Gets Weekends Off
 
DLax85's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Gear Monkey
Posts: 3,189
Default

Originally Posted by Raptor View Post
I agree that the disability issue is often overlooked when some folks talk about increased B plan percentages and/or cash over cap.

If you wouldn't go without health or life insurance, then fixing the B plan to protect those on disability is a key component that must not be overlooked.
The B fund isn't designed to cover long term disability, so let's not try to get fancy and make it do so

That's how we get ourselves in trouble --- as what we thought we negotiated doesn't turn out to be true

Let's Keep It Simple!

Tie A plan cap to some very reasonable amount that most pilots attain --- fill in the gap with increased B fund payments

Cash over Cap if we can get it --- or perhaps a higher cap than the A fund

Let's tie these caps to other portions of the contract -- A fund Cap = WB Capt rate x Annual BLG has been suggested

B fund Cap = WB Capt rate x 1,000 hours (...or 1,200 hours)

Given our status quo, and the company's desire to eliminate/freeze the A fund for a pure B fund, I don't see us acheieving more than that

And I'm at a loss to see why they'd agree to it now

We had leverage an didn't have the collective SA to use it

Hopefully it's there next time as well
DLax85 is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Albief15
Cargo
69
07-03-2015 09:59 AM
steamgauge
Cargo
95
03-24-2013 05:55 PM
Freighter Captain
Cargo
3
05-16-2005 06:00 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices