|
Originally Posted by vc931
(Post 2560022)
The idea that everyone should make the same from the DB pension plan no matter how productive you were for the company during your career, seems a little socialistic to me. Those who worked the longest and the most should be rewarded for that service. Those who didn't work so much because they had a side business or spent lots of time on a military job made that choice for themselves and probably have another pension anyway. I have no problem with the hard workers making more.
The mentality that trades additional productivity for additional $$$ is a losing game. |
Originally Posted by vc931
(Post 2560022)
The idea that everyone should make the same from the DB pension plan no matter how productive you were for the company during your career, seems a little socialistic to me. Those who worked the longest and the most should be rewarded for that service. Those who didn't work so much because they had a side business or spent lots of time on a military job made that choice for themselves and probably have another pension anyway. I have no problem with the hard workers making more.
Right now a guy can work the minimum (whatever that is) or be out on LTD for an extended time and as long as they achieve a five year average of $260k, they can get the plan maximum. Show me in the new plan the numbers for that guy. If it’s not $130k, then there is a minimum level of effort greater than what is required now. The very worst case scenario needs to be what we easily get now. The examples given on the videos assume 1000CHs/yr. A high percentage of the crew force doesn’t work 1000CHs/yr. I’ve never exceeded 900. ALPA MEC LURKERS: any calculator provided should include an input for CH worked. As a mid 40s hire and a QOL bidder, I’m a strong no. |
Just so there is no misunderstanding, I was talking about a widebody captain sitting reserve for five years - not a captain who upgraded in five years.
Also, I have no problem with pilots being rewarded for their years of service. I do have a problem with a VB Plan that could potentially reward those who prefer to work extra, especially since it is no secret that there quite a few here who do it when they shouldn’t. That someone like that would also earn extra towards their retirement beyond what someone sitting reserve would earn for example would be especially galling. |
Originally Posted by pinseeker
(Post 2560023)
I don't know. Maybe the fact that he said right now a five year captain can do it, not by the end of the contract. That pay rate that you mention doesn't take effect until November of 2020, so maybe 2021, but I still doubt it only doing RLG and no extra. RLG would have to average better than 72 and 90 hours in a 4 and 5 week bid month. Maybe we could get an arbitrator to rule on what his language meant.:D. If we wait long enough, a second year FO will be able to get a high five.
If everybody upgraded as soon as they could, we wouldn't have less than 5 year captains. |
Originally Posted by Iwa Washi
(Post 2560127)
Also, I have no problem with pilots being rewarded for their years of service. I do have a problem with a VB Plan that could potentially reward those who prefer to work extra, especially since it is no secret that there quite a few here who do it when they shouldn’t. That someone like that would also earn extra towards their retirement beyond what someone sitting reserve would earn for example would be especially galling.
This is really funny to me. I bet you’re one of the “equal outcome” people vs. “equal opportunity”. This feels like you’re saying “I’m not working any extra and neither will you because I know what’s best for you”. And what the heck does “since it is no secret that there quite a few here who do it when they shouldn’t.” mean? Is there some secret code I’m unaware of that says I should not work more than my BLG each month? If you’re scared of work, please allow those people who aren’t scared to work themselves to the grave. You sir are what we affectionally call a “control freak”. |
Originally Posted by CompetentFool
(Post 2560296)
You also said earlier “I personally will not accept or vote for a retirement plan that rewards individuals working extra.“
This is really funny to me. I bet you’re one of the “equal outcome” people vs. “equal opportunity”. This feels like you’re saying “I’m not working any extra and neither will you because I know what’s best for you”. And what the heck does “since it is no secret that there quite a few here who do it when they shouldn’t.” mean? Is there some secret code I’m unaware of that says I should not work more than my BLG each month? If you’re scared of work, please allow those people who aren’t scared to work themselves to the grave. You sir are what we affectionally call a “control freak”. However, freezing the current A plan for those who don’t have their “High 5” yet and/or their 25 YOS yet certainly, does not provide them the “equal opportunity” to maximize their retirement like many on the property have already been given. Most pilots at FedEx have carefully planned when to fly extra, sell back vacation, when to upgrade, based on their individual family & financial needs Many senior guys on property took full advantage of this, and planned the “right time” to do each of those, for their personal situation. When they acted, ALL of the YOS 2% multipliers were applied to their highest earnings years Freezing the current A plan, as we switch to a VB will DENY many pilots the “Same, Equal Opportunity” to fully leverage the “High 5” structure of our current A Plan There are pilots who will absolutely make LESS under the “Freeze A & Restart with VB” proposal, even if they maximize their earnings with the new VB limits This not only presents a fundamental problem now, but significantly reduces pilot flexibility moving forward The move to a system based on “Career Average Earnings” will have many “second-order effects” many are simply not seeing |
Originally Posted by CompetentFool
(Post 2560296)
You also said earlier “I personally will not accept or vote for a retirement plan that rewards individuals working extra.“
This is really funny to me. I bet you’re one of the “equal outcome” people vs. “equal opportunity”. This feels like you’re saying “I’m not working any extra and neither will you because I know what’s best for you”. And what the heck does “since it is no secret that there quite a few here who do it when they shouldn’t.” mean? Is there some secret code I’m unaware of that says I should not work more than my BLG each month? If you’re scared of work, please allow those people who aren’t scared to work themselves to the grave. You sir are what we affectionally call a “control freak”. |
Originally Posted by CompetentFool
(Post 2560296)
You also said earlier “I personally will not accept or vote for a retirement plan that rewards individuals working extra.“
This is really funny to me. I bet you’re one of the “equal outcome” people vs. “equal opportunity”. This feels like you’re saying “I’m not working any extra and neither will you because I know what’s best for you”. And what the heck does “since it is no secret that there quite a few here who do it when they shouldn’t.” mean? Is there some secret code I’m unaware of that says I should not work more than my BLG each month? If you’re scared of work, please allow those people who aren’t scared to work themselves to the grave. You sir are what we affectionally call a “control freak”. Though we probably have never met, you apparently know me so well that you feel comfortable enough to start labeling me and leveling personal attacks. From your post I gather you disagree with me, and I respect that. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and they have the absolute right to express it. So yea, when it comes to our current retirement and what I have seen so far of this VB Plan, I'd rather not change. I was a no voter in 2015 and preferred to fight a little longer for cash over cap and possibly some kind of increase to the A Plan and was even personally willing to pay an assessment to keep the fight going. To clarify, I am not against flying extra when we are not at an impasse during negotiations and I have even done so myself from time to time when we were not. It certainly helps those who need to reach their high five quicker if they are running out of time, so it is a nice option to have. Other than that, it currently contributes nothing towards your A Plan if your high five has been maxed. However, I fear that this new VB Plan could change that, and yes, I would be against that for two reasons: First, assuming my 260k high five has been reached, my current A Plan is set with the only variable being years of service. I can work as much or as little as I want and nothing changes. With the new VB Plan, depending on what is negotiated, I could find myself having to work extra to achieve what I previously had just working my line. The devil is in the details on this and I guess time will tell once we have all the information on whether this will be an issue or not, but what I am currently getting is not comforting. If it does come to pass that this would be true, I would go so far as calling this another give back. Second, and more important, we already have a huge problem with our fellow brothers and sisters working extra when negotiations are at an impasse. The company sees this, looking past our negotiators, and laughs when our team is trying to draw the line and drive a hard bargain. As far as the company is concerned, they see our lack of collective resolve and play us with predictable results. So yes, I see no point in changing our retirement system to reward this type of behavior even further. Given the “workplace harassment” card the company can play, it has become increasingly difficult to discourage it. Flying extra will give you a larger paycheck, and more money in your B fund – I feel that is enough. I don't see any good in changing that so it contributes more money into this VB Plan if a 260k high five A Plan did not. That’s my humble opinion and that’s all it is. You can disagree with it and I respect that. If you want to continue attacking me for it, then feel free, but I don’t think you are helping yourself or your cause by doing so. |
crewmember being moved out of 1/c to Business
|
Originally Posted by Iwa Washi
(Post 2560344)
Howdy Mr. fool! How are you doing? Everything OK? Rough night? You seem rather angry!
Though we probably have never met, you apparently know me so well that you feel comfortable enough to start labeling me and leveling personal attacks. From your post I gather you disagree with me, and I respect that. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and they have the absolute right to express it. So yea, when it comes to our current retirement and what I have seen so far of this VB Plan, I'd rather not change. I was a no voter in 2015 and preferred to fight a little longer for cash over cap and possibly some kind of increase to the A Plan and was even personally willing to pay an assessment to keep the fight going. To clarify, I am not against flying extra when we are not at an impasse during negotiations and I have even done so myself from time to time when we were not. It certainly helps those who need to reach their high five quicker if they are running out of time, so it is a nice option to have. Other than that, it currently contributes nothing towards your A Plan if your high five has been maxed. However, I fear that this new VB Plan could change that, and yes, I would be against that for two reasons: First, assuming my 260k high five has been reached, my current A Plan is set with the only variable being years of service. I can work as much or as little as I want and nothing changes. With the new VB Plan, depending on what is negotiated, I could find myself having to work extra to achieve what I previously had just working my line. The devil is in the details on this and I guess time will tell once we have all the information on whether this will be an issue or not, but what I am currently getting is not comforting. If it does come to pass that this would be true, I would go so far as calling this another give back. Second, and more important, we already have a huge problem with our fellow brothers and sisters working extra when negotiations are at an impasse. The company sees this, looking past our negotiators, and laughs when our team is trying to draw the line and drive a hard bargain. As far as the company is concerned, they see our lack of collective resolve and play us with predictable results. So yes, I see no point in changing our retirement system to reward this type of behavior even further. Given the “workplace harassment” card the company can play, it has become increasingly difficult to discourage it. Flying extra will give you a larger paycheck, and more money in your B fund – I feel that is enough. I don't see any good in changing that so it contributes more money into this VB Plan if a 260k high five A Plan did not. That’s my humble opinion and that’s all it is. You can disagree with it and I respect that. If you want to continue attacking me for it, then feel free, but I don’t think you are helping yourself or your cause by doing so. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:48 PM. |
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands