What I find interesting is many people have said the $$ improvements aren't enough to change...but no one, to my knowledge, has used the modeler and indicated that the value they receive is Less than our current A plan would produce for them

 

First of all, the modeler data hasn’t been negotiated. So, it’s just an educated guess at this point. But, I can tell you this for sure, there is no way I would vote in favor of this plan if my gain was actually 3-4K/year. And that’s what the modeler said I’d get...

With a change of plan, we’re adding risk. What if we screw up the language? What if the market tanks? Lots of variables, and don’t think the company won’t try to exploit them.

I’m not necessarily risk averse, but I’d have to see a much bigger upside if I was going to risk my current pension. And 3-4K/year isn’t even remotely close.

The union fell in love with this plan at first sight. They spent very little time exploring options or trying to let us make decisions. If they’d have spent half the effort on improving our A plan during negotiations as they have selling this scheme, we might have seen an improvement.

And just to be clear, I’d much rather see them explore a flat dollar amount than this plan.

 

1st, the $160K was in the brown box of the modeler, the one that is supposedly guaranteed. The other boxes took the amount to over $200K. I would be happy to provide a screenshot, but I clicked that I agreed that this information was only for FedEx pilots.
2nd, you still haven't shown how the funding is cheaper for a guaranteed $160K than it is for a guaranteed $130K.

I only hope that the this forum is an accurate reflection on how the rest of the crew force feels about this plan. I know most people I talk to, including former R&I guys, don't think the MEC can deliver.

 

If we did the flat model and the VB Plan we wouldn’t have to renegotiate more than one contract because you guys tell us the VB Plan is going to make the millennials as rich as Nancy Pelosi.

 

I guess “to your knowledge” means you don’t read all the posts.

Read post #5 in this thread.

I had an hour long discussion with my block rep concerning what I state in the post. He said my 15% linear adjustment to parts of the data is accurate and that people like me are who they are most concerned with.

OBTW, as stated above, assumptions in the model have yet to be negotiated.

 

Well the modeler is just that and nothing has been negotiated the modeler is not guaranteed but our pension is. That is a BIG difference and most are saying that us assuming all the risk is not worth the meager increases most are seeing in payout.

 

Or even known.. We are being told to trust with no real way to verify.. We have no way to know the accuracy of the modeler.. Guess that’s what makes it so proprietary?

 

If you have your 25 years and Hi 5, this plan is an awesome deal. You get additional years tacked on the end, and more incentive to work through your retirement years if that is something you want.

If you do not have 25 years nor your hi 5, you could be really screwed, unless you are a very young new hire.

So this plan is designed primarily for those guys ready to walk out the door in the next few years, as a parting gift. As an effect, the very young could, (could) have the ability to increase their retirement. The middle get to buy either the proverbial retirement cake or the silver spoon for the two ends of the seniority list.

 

Man you have really swallowed the hook. Its a ****ing model, of course it will show a benefit. What you don't seem to get is a lot of us don't trust the model or the union to negotiate this deal nor do we want to release the company from their liability to provide us with a minimum fixed benefit after retirement. I don't care if you could possibly double the benefit, I am not willing to accept any more market risk for my A fund.

I don't have a single high 5 yet, and only have 5 left to work at most. Let me get those high 5 and I can double my benefit as it stands right now. And that is guaranteed. Freeze it now and MAYBE I can add at most a couple of grand to my annual benefit by taking on all of the market risk, no thanks.

Trust this union to negotiate a deal like this and trust the company to not exploit it, not in a million years.

 

One of the things no one has pointed out either are the “assumed” pay raises in this modeler? When I adjust them back to realistic/historical, the VB is ALWAYS less than the current A plan (even if i go with a 10% increase over the current 15 maximum years i have left). So not only are we accepting the risk of the market, but we’re trading away contract negations, because if our future contract raises don’t “outperform” the modeler the projections are useless even if the 2% and hurdle rate are negotiated as modeled. We’ll be “forced” to trade all other contract benefits in exchange for pay raises which “hopefully” can keep up with this modeler’s anticipated ones.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk