StarClipper

Surpringly the MEC really gave the negotiation committee the permission to move forward and negotiate our retirement plan with the company. Wow I’m so shocked be his decision. 😏😏😏

What these guys fail to realize is even if we give this up now. The company is still going to come for more next contract negotiation. The company goal is to take as much as we will give them and it looks like my union goal is the give the company as much as the company wants.

NewOldGuy

I agree. Not sure why we’re even negotiating? This thing is supposed to be so “wonderful” for us both. We’re outside of section six. I don’t think we should be pursuing it at all, but if we are it shouldn’t be “negotiated”. We should be submitting a “shoot for the moon proposal” and the company can either take it or leave it! Then hopefully our union would still allow us to have an input at some point.
To be clear, I don’t believe we should be pursuing this at all, but if we are, there should be ZERO negotiating required.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

gatorhater

Apparently those survey results are vastly different than the opinions I hear in person.

I guess it’s a little bit like every contract I’ve ever voted on. Difference there is you can usually find a few people in favor of it, I’ve yet to talk to a fellow pilot with less than 20 years and older than 30 who is in favor of this. There were one or two but since you can find their phone numbers on the ALPA website, I don’t count them.

kwri10s

Can a proposal be made that would only allow members to vote on any proposed change to the retirement plan, outside of normal section 6 negotiations, if the member has not already maximized their retirement under the current plan?

In other words if you already have your 25 YOS and max cap of $260, then you cannot vote on any change outside normal section 6. It seems we have pilots that cannot in any way be negatively affected by any change, able to vote on a process that might have significant adverse affect on those that do not already have their 25 YOS and $260 cap.

In effect we are allowing a "B scale" retirement vote if those that are already "whole" can vote to make others less than "whole".

Thrust Hold

From what I've been told this is being done outside of Section 6, so that we aren't subject to any Status Quo type Arbitration should there be any. Pensions are no longer Status Quo and could compromise our position.

Don't shoot the messenger. Just what I was told when I inquired.

jetstar1

How much money would have been lost yesterday had we been in a VB plan? The A plan didn’t lose a dime. Now if you are the pilot retiring by the end of the year under the VB plan, sorry for your bad luck.

They better be shooting for the moon! At least a 10% raise and an increase to at least 12% on the B plan. The company already figured out how to find the pitfalls in this new plan. We are stupid if this gets ratified.

Every pilot that has the high five gets their cake and eats it too under this plan. A lot will get screwed. I thought before that ALPA didn’t want to have two groups of pilots under different plans? Call it what you will, this will be those that get both.

I also heard this BS. There are some people trying to get an adjustment for those with the high five that are too close to retirement that wouldn’t be able to get any more $$ from the VB plan. How about NO! This is ridiculous!

kronan

The A plan didn't lose a dime? Really, that's what you think?

I'm thinking the A plan assets lost a pretty hefty percentage (S&P 4% this week, Nasdaq 3.7%)
YTD on SPX (500 Index fund) is still at 3.5% after the losses of this week.

Pension Benefit, however, unchanged.
How this week would impact on the VB Benefit, hard to say. Will say that as negotiated we'd receive the Higher of Market Returns or the 2% Floor.

And, if negotiated as desired, every single pilot has a 260 FAE x YOS. (Soft Freeze)

NewOldGuy

Kronan,
The difference is the loss on the A Plan’s funds yesterday are the Company’s problem. They have to make that up. The loss on the VB plan comes from OUR pockets, hence the reason for the floor AND the hurdle rate. They take the money from the VB plans profits in excess of 5% (current proposed hurdle rate) to guarantee the 2% in down years. What happens at times when the VB has an extended period of less than 5%? In other words the funds aren’t there? Then that money comes from the capital in the fund and this lowers investments and lowers compound growth. It’s a pyramid scheme and we’re doing it to ourself. Robbing Peter to pay Paul except in this case we are Peter!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

FrankTheTank

Where are those results?

Fdxlag2

In the vault. Classified Secret No Line Pilot.