2% pay raise in Oct 2020
08-25-2020 | 03:21 PM
#91
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,424
Likes: 0
From: 757 Capt
First,
The offer we received was for 16.5%, cash over cap up to 360’sh thousand.
Second, people look at our ‘frozen’ pension and grossly underestimate its actual value to them
If you use the typical ROT of a 4% withdrawal rate, our frozen pension is the rough equivalent of $3.2M.
If ALL of your savings were tax free, and you earned 7% over 25 years, you’d need to save $47,284 for 25 straight years.
People also underestimate the impact of taxes on your return. A 20% B plan this year means your tax deferred limits could be filled completely by the B plan if you’re income is over 285. Every dollar over that has a minimum of 25% going to taxes, 36% if you’re single.
Behaviorally, are you actually saving all of that cash over cap? Or your former 401k contributions? Or are you buying a boat, a new plane, a Tesla, 911?
If you are saving it, transaction costs and taxes also take a bite. Unless you’re a true buy and hold only kind of investor.
The simple fact that we defer all taxes on our Pension, is a huge benefit.
Eventually, with no changes, the calculation will change.
But that’s still quite aways down the road, and that assumes no changes to our A plan or B plan.
One must have for me, in this next CBA, is cash over cap on our B plan.
Ideally, I’d like it to be @ 12% too.
Even thinking outside the box, if our next CBA takes 2+ years (which seems to be our historic norm), perhaps a 7% hourly increase and a change to a 12% cash over cap at DOS
The offer we received was for 16.5%, cash over cap up to 360’sh thousand.
Second, people look at our ‘frozen’ pension and grossly underestimate its actual value to them
If you use the typical ROT of a 4% withdrawal rate, our frozen pension is the rough equivalent of $3.2M.
If ALL of your savings were tax free, and you earned 7% over 25 years, you’d need to save $47,284 for 25 straight years.
People also underestimate the impact of taxes on your return. A 20% B plan this year means your tax deferred limits could be filled completely by the B plan if you’re income is over 285. Every dollar over that has a minimum of 25% going to taxes, 36% if you’re single.
Behaviorally, are you actually saving all of that cash over cap? Or your former 401k contributions? Or are you buying a boat, a new plane, a Tesla, 911?
If you are saving it, transaction costs and taxes also take a bite. Unless you’re a true buy and hold only kind of investor.
The simple fact that we defer all taxes on our Pension, is a huge benefit.
Eventually, with no changes, the calculation will change.
But that’s still quite aways down the road, and that assumes no changes to our A plan or B plan.
One must have for me, in this next CBA, is cash over cap on our B plan.
Ideally, I’d like it to be @ 12% too.
Even thinking outside the box, if our next CBA takes 2+ years (which seems to be our historic norm), perhaps a 7% hourly increase and a change to a 12% cash over cap at DOS
08-25-2020 | 05:58 PM
#92
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,224
Likes: 0
So explain to a new guy why he should negotiate an increase to the current FAE or years of service on the legacy plan when the older group failed for 20+ years to do anything about it. It sounds to me like a bunch of guys with less than 10 years left want the rest of the group to prop them up out the door when they failed to hold the line for 20+ years on a pension increase. Why is that on all the new guys to fix?
Not being snarky just asking honest questions. Why would we not want to negotiate something that is self growing and doesn't have to be negotiated for a big increase every contract to keep up with inflation. Why would we not want to look at something that sustains itself over time?
That same group on the way out is flying exceptionally high amounts of draft. Are they willing to do anything to help their cause or do they want everyone else to sacrifice for them? Im sorry but im not going to stand by while they fly every bit of draft they can get and then prop them up on the way out the door.
The current pension formula is obviously very expensive to increase from a liabilities standpoint. Why do we want a small bump every 20 years? Why not look at something that is more self stabilizing? To me we have a very clear divide. We have the group with less than 10 years left that want fixed what they did not stand up for the past 20 years.
Not being snarky just asking honest questions. Why would we not want to negotiate something that is self growing and doesn't have to be negotiated for a big increase every contract to keep up with inflation. Why would we not want to look at something that sustains itself over time?
That same group on the way out is flying exceptionally high amounts of draft. Are they willing to do anything to help their cause or do they want everyone else to sacrifice for them? Im sorry but im not going to stand by while they fly every bit of draft they can get and then prop them up on the way out the door.
The current pension formula is obviously very expensive to increase from a liabilities standpoint. Why do we want a small bump every 20 years? Why not look at something that is more self stabilizing? To me we have a very clear divide. We have the group with less than 10 years left that want fixed what they did not stand up for the past 20 years.
My guess is that new hires would also like to see retirement gains in the next contract...
You sound entitled as hell. Why do you care if someone is flying draft now? Are we negotiating? By withholding your services, what are you trying to achieve? You really have a lot to learn.
This “old group” didn’t screw you. We negotiated for higher first year pay, move packages, etc. The company wanted to put new hires on a much lower retirement plan, but those old guys didn’t sell you out, even though we may been able to increase our benefit by doing so.
Many of us worked at previous airlines that had a B scale. That was the old guys selling out future employees giving them a much reduced pay scale for the first 5 years. We’ve never done that, and we’ve actually worked hard to increase new hire benefits.
A dose of humility and respect would serve you well. The old guys you hate are the ones that fought for the contract you work under.
Last edited by golfandfly; 08-25-2020 at 06:40 PM.
08-25-2020 | 06:02 PM
#93
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,224
Likes: 0
Nowork,
After reading your posts, I’m very surprised we work at the same airline. I too recently came from another major and have an experience and perspective that is 180 out from yours in terms of what FedEx provides for me today and what I hope for it to provide in my retirement years. Even if everyone suspended the influence of Covid on the economy and how the big three are forecast to furlough nearly 10k of our pilot brethren, how is this gig not a substantially better flying position than what was over there ‘pre-rona’?
Your comments lead me to believe that you are unhappy and angry with those about to retire. The very people that built up THE industry leading contract, QOL, pay and retirement. In my opinion, focusing on 4k a month in training and no hotel is losing the forest for the trees. Further you are not even comparing apples to apples, at AA you didn't get hotel or per diem if you did training in your base OR if you lived within 50 miles of the training facility. Even counting training pay, my first year at FedEx eclipsed AA. And recently, outside of a negotiation, our Captains fought for and got hotels for BI.
The efforts of those Captains further reflects the professionals I fly with on the line. Actions like BI hotels and the fact I never pay for food or drinks because the boss is always buying, aren’t dividing us as you say, but uniting us together so we can stop our in-fighting and focus on what matters.
I like this job, I like this company, and I’m grateful to be here to do it. So, I do the walk around, fold the napkin on the water bottle, make the coffee and back up the guy or gal sitting to my left as best I can and in exchange I get to learn how to fly in this system and most importantly learn how make this job last for my next 30 years so someday I can hopefully pass along a fantastic job to the next generation.
After reading your posts, I’m very surprised we work at the same airline. I too recently came from another major and have an experience and perspective that is 180 out from yours in terms of what FedEx provides for me today and what I hope for it to provide in my retirement years. Even if everyone suspended the influence of Covid on the economy and how the big three are forecast to furlough nearly 10k of our pilot brethren, how is this gig not a substantially better flying position than what was over there ‘pre-rona’?
Your comments lead me to believe that you are unhappy and angry with those about to retire. The very people that built up THE industry leading contract, QOL, pay and retirement. In my opinion, focusing on 4k a month in training and no hotel is losing the forest for the trees. Further you are not even comparing apples to apples, at AA you didn't get hotel or per diem if you did training in your base OR if you lived within 50 miles of the training facility. Even counting training pay, my first year at FedEx eclipsed AA. And recently, outside of a negotiation, our Captains fought for and got hotels for BI.
The efforts of those Captains further reflects the professionals I fly with on the line. Actions like BI hotels and the fact I never pay for food or drinks because the boss is always buying, aren’t dividing us as you say, but uniting us together so we can stop our in-fighting and focus on what matters.
I like this job, I like this company, and I’m grateful to be here to do it. So, I do the walk around, fold the napkin on the water bottle, make the coffee and back up the guy or gal sitting to my left as best I can and in exchange I get to learn how to fly in this system and most importantly learn how make this job last for my next 30 years so someday I can hopefully pass along a fantastic job to the next generation.
08-25-2020 | 06:22 PM
#94
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,224
Likes: 0
It sounds like my points may be a bit misconstrued. Let me try to simplify what im saying.
1.) I hear a lot of “the older group” saying I will only look at an increase to the current A plan. Well, if that is so, why didnt you do that and hold the line on those increases the past 20 + years when it was not improved? Im not saying this trying to be divisive its just the facts of the past. Why is it “the younger groups” job to fix 20+ years of them not standing up as they walk out the door?
2.) I love this job and have said we have the industry best contract numerous times on this forum. In fact, I have even got a little heated with those who constantly complain about the tiny items and miss the elephant in the room.
3.) Im just very confused on why we would continue to stay in a pension formula that we have not been able to increase in over 20 years. Why would we not look at a different formula that adds value for us and is self increasing and sustaining. If we need to buy a few up so be it. We are a team so lets lift a few up that may be behind in the new formula.
4.) Im a team player and very much enjoy the people I fly with. I honestly have a fun time going to work (even when COVID has everything shut down).
5.) I hope we find a way forward and get together for this contract and get it rite with retirement. Lets not get in the weeds trying to mess with 10-15 things and creat new things.
1.) I hear a lot of “the older group” saying I will only look at an increase to the current A plan. Well, if that is so, why didnt you do that and hold the line on those increases the past 20 + years when it was not improved? Im not saying this trying to be divisive its just the facts of the past. Why is it “the younger groups” job to fix 20+ years of them not standing up as they walk out the door?
2.) I love this job and have said we have the industry best contract numerous times on this forum. In fact, I have even got a little heated with those who constantly complain about the tiny items and miss the elephant in the room.
3.) Im just very confused on why we would continue to stay in a pension formula that we have not been able to increase in over 20 years. Why would we not look at a different formula that adds value for us and is self increasing and sustaining. If we need to buy a few up so be it. We are a team so lets lift a few up that may be behind in the new formula.
4.) Im a team player and very much enjoy the people I fly with. I honestly have a fun time going to work (even when COVID has everything shut down).
5.) I hope we find a way forward and get together for this contract and get it rite with retirement. Lets not get in the weeds trying to mess with 10-15 things and creat new things.
You act like we’re asking you to dive on the hand grenade for us. I’d have no problem allowing a choice in pension plans if they are improved choices for all of us.
BTW, the company offered less than 17% last contract and it had a cap. Sorry I don’t remember the details, but it wasn’t unlimited. If you would want to raise that cap, you’d have to negotiate that as well.
The A plan was improved in 2006 for certain groups. What, I thought you said we’ve never been able to make any progress? They raised the multiplier for certain groups closer to retirement (I believe over 50 and a specified number of years of service). I believe the multiplier went to 2.2% for some (143k). So some that retired under the 2006 contract will get more than someone retiring today. It was a band-aid fix, but did increase the benefit for some. And $130k still sounded pretty decent in 2006. Having a $260k high five was pretty good at that time.
Our next contract was 2015 (we had a two year extension of the 2006 contract). We utterly failed here. Many of us were adamant “no” voters and are on record here saying it then. It’s not like we’ve had multiple contracts where we didn’t “fix” retirement. Really just one really big fail. We have another chance soon. I’m open to most ideas that will give us a significant bump. A fund improvements, cash over cap B fund (with our current A), flat dollar...
Last edited by golfandfly; 08-25-2020 at 06:45 PM.
08-25-2020 | 06:30 PM
#95
Line Holder
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
From: FedEx
-Improve the B plan with an increase and cash over cap.
-Negotiate a self sustaining pension formula that grows with compensation and time. Use our current pension deaign as leverage while we still have it.
-Increase pay and keep work rule negotiations to a minimum; history has shown we're our own worst enemy.
Just my $1.05.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk
-Negotiate a self sustaining pension formula that grows with compensation and time. Use our current pension deaign as leverage while we still have it.
-Increase pay and keep work rule negotiations to a minimum; history has shown we're our own worst enemy.
Just my $1.05.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk
08-25-2020 | 06:36 PM
#96
Line Holder
Joined: May 2013
Posts: 1,607
Likes: 4
From: No Hats No Jackets No PAX
Really great info on the breakdown of where the gains were made and how the originators of Federal Express brought their company forward contract after contract. To many times history is forgotten and how we got where we are today, the struggle is real. Very insightful for those of us “on the outside looking in” from those who have had skin in the game for a decade and far more.
Our outfit struggles with the same unknown clashes/struggles/tactics of contracts/mergers past and relatively newer folks not understanding how confrontational contract talk can truly be throwing fuel on the fire unceremoniously. We were significantly behind FedEx/UPS but were just above the Majors nearly 10 years ago (not by much and leap frogged quickly thereafter). FedEx/UPS built the foundation for many to chase and while we are still significantly behind it helps to understand how gains were actually achieved in this ever changing environment. I learned a lot of history on decent gains and losses within our outfit from those who actually lived it. Yes, mistakes are made - but your forum is very good at breaking down the steps that were taken to be where your at today. Y’all have a 20 year head start in the business and our folks forget this at times. Definitely gain as much as you can, but be realistic as well and I appreciate the benchmark you have provided for us to shoot for. $ Compensation matters, Work Rules matter; therefore, Lifestyle matters. Well done, keep on keeping on. Thank You for the knowledge.
Our outfit struggles with the same unknown clashes/struggles/tactics of contracts/mergers past and relatively newer folks not understanding how confrontational contract talk can truly be throwing fuel on the fire unceremoniously. We were significantly behind FedEx/UPS but were just above the Majors nearly 10 years ago (not by much and leap frogged quickly thereafter). FedEx/UPS built the foundation for many to chase and while we are still significantly behind it helps to understand how gains were actually achieved in this ever changing environment. I learned a lot of history on decent gains and losses within our outfit from those who actually lived it. Yes, mistakes are made - but your forum is very good at breaking down the steps that were taken to be where your at today. Y’all have a 20 year head start in the business and our folks forget this at times. Definitely gain as much as you can, but be realistic as well and I appreciate the benchmark you have provided for us to shoot for. $ Compensation matters, Work Rules matter; therefore, Lifestyle matters. Well done, keep on keeping on. Thank You for the knowledge.
08-25-2020 | 10:03 PM
#97
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2017
Posts: 2,174
Likes: 1
2% pay raise in Oct 2020
So explain to a new guy why he should negotiate an increase to the current FAE or years of service on the legacy plan when the older group failed for 20+ years to do anything about it. It sounds to me like a bunch of guys with less than 10 years left want the rest of the group to prop them up out the door when they failed to hold the line for 20+ years on a pension increase. Why is that on all the new guys to fix?
Not being snarky just asking honest questions. Why would we not want to negotiate something that is self growing and doesn't have to be negotiated for a big increase every contract to keep up with inflation. Why would we not want to look at something that sustains itself over time?
That same group on the way out is flying exceptionally high amounts of draft. Are they willing to do anything to help their cause or do they want everyone else to sacrifice for them? Im sorry but im not going to stand by while they fly every bit of draft they can get and then prop them up on the way out the door.
The current pension formula is obviously very expensive to increase from a liabilities standpoint. Why do we want a small bump every 20 years? Why not look at something that is more self stabilizing? To me we have a very clear divide. We have the group with less than 10 years left that want fixed what they did not stand up for the past 20 years.
Not being snarky just asking honest questions. Why would we not want to negotiate something that is self growing and doesn't have to be negotiated for a big increase every contract to keep up with inflation. Why would we not want to look at something that sustains itself over time?
That same group on the way out is flying exceptionally high amounts of draft. Are they willing to do anything to help their cause or do they want everyone else to sacrifice for them? Im sorry but im not going to stand by while they fly every bit of draft they can get and then prop them up on the way out the door.
The current pension formula is obviously very expensive to increase from a liabilities standpoint. Why do we want a small bump every 20 years? Why not look at something that is more self stabilizing? To me we have a very clear divide. We have the group with less than 10 years left that want fixed what they did not stand up for the past 20 years.
Just because it wasn’t possible in the past does not mean it’s not possible in the future. It all depends on the circumstances present during each contract cycle. That includes a different demographic of pilots when each contract is ratified.
Also, I don’t necessarily see a difference in interests between pilots who supposedly only have 10 years left versus those who have more. Any retirement improvement for those pilots will also help all the other ones.
Lastly, I don’t begrudge anyone flying draft. It’s contractual and therefore I believe you should have no problem with them working it anymore than any pilot exercising any other contractual right while also flying draft.
I highly doubt much capital was spent to pay us 4K a month in training and be around legacy industry bottom for first year pay. Plus we have no hotel paid for like other majors. Not a gripe, but get real on spending capital. I’m sure the company gladly agreed to those terms.
You didn’t have the opportunity to F us last contract infact just the opposite. The company offered us a substantial B only plan at 20% + uncapped. For younger pilots with time value of money that’s a winner over a 30 + year frozen A plan. The reason it was not looked at was it would have divided the group and it doesn’t help the older group. So if anything turning it down screwed the younger group.
I have been told the stories of the pilot groups attitude and actions as a whole when it comes to draft during negotiations. The group as a whole didn’t hold the line then and they won’t do it again. A few will always try but 70% of this group won’t blink an eye and continuing slopping from the trough of draft. Heck they fight over it at straight pay with OTP/PNP in normal times.
Im not trying to be snarky just very clearly don’t agree with your points.
You didn’t have the opportunity to F us last contract infact just the opposite. The company offered us a substantial B only plan at 20% + uncapped. For younger pilots with time value of money that’s a winner over a 30 + year frozen A plan. The reason it was not looked at was it would have divided the group and it doesn’t help the older group. So if anything turning it down screwed the younger group.
I have been told the stories of the pilot groups attitude and actions as a whole when it comes to draft during negotiations. The group as a whole didn’t hold the line then and they won’t do it again. A few will always try but 70% of this group won’t blink an eye and continuing slopping from the trough of draft. Heck they fight over it at straight pay with OTP/PNP in normal times.
Im not trying to be snarky just very clearly don’t agree with your points.
With that said, you weren’t here during the last contract cycle. You are only going off of here say. Why not just listen and observe a contract cycle before taking everything as gospel? Let’s not judge our pilots by war stories, gripes, and grievances we hear on the line. There are always two sides to a story. Besides, about a quarter of the pilots who voted on the last contract are probably gone with another quarter probably gone before the next ratification vote. This next vote will be comprised by a totally different demographic of pilots.
Last edited by FXLAX; 08-25-2020 at 10:14 PM.
08-26-2020 | 05:42 AM
#98
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2015
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
I am very impressed by the accumulated knowledge of Not much Work and lots of time to Play and Post.
He/she/it/they is very well connected to information sources. Especially so for someone who is relatively recent on the scene, as I once was.
I happen to know how much pilots who are retiring under this contract are losing per year, because of the decision by some block reps of larger blocks to do a roll call vote rather than allow the new pilots to go onto a sole B-plan, albeit at a higher percentage than the old-timers. What do your information sources tell you?
As a purported relatively new hire, do you agree with their decision? Depending on your assumptions, or knowledge, pertaining to the longevity of our pilot group, which way would you have voted if you were on the MEC at the time?
And since you have access to a remarkable amount of information, what is our average lifespan after we retire? And how should that inform our per diem rates? Stated differently, is there any relationship between the number of hours we fly, and our longevity? Should our per diem be based on the price of a meal, or how much we decrease our life span for having exposed ourselves to the increased radiation of the cosmos while at altitude flying to that meal?
I will gain nothing from an increase in retirement benefits or per diem rates or any other proviso in the next contract. But I think the per diem rates should be doubled at a bare minimum. What say you? And why and how do you arrive at your conclusion? If you choose the path of least resistance, we, the rickshaw wallahs will not benefit one iota. But if you increase hourly pay rates, solely, magically, ALPA becomes a beneficiary also. Should we allow ALPA a cut of our per diem so they are encouraged to fight for it at long last? Should we allow them a cut of our retirement so they fight for it at last?
If you are too busy playing to answer this for a while, I understand. I'll return to the rickshaw stand now.
He/she/it/they is very well connected to information sources. Especially so for someone who is relatively recent on the scene, as I once was.
I happen to know how much pilots who are retiring under this contract are losing per year, because of the decision by some block reps of larger blocks to do a roll call vote rather than allow the new pilots to go onto a sole B-plan, albeit at a higher percentage than the old-timers. What do your information sources tell you?
As a purported relatively new hire, do you agree with their decision? Depending on your assumptions, or knowledge, pertaining to the longevity of our pilot group, which way would you have voted if you were on the MEC at the time?
And since you have access to a remarkable amount of information, what is our average lifespan after we retire? And how should that inform our per diem rates? Stated differently, is there any relationship between the number of hours we fly, and our longevity? Should our per diem be based on the price of a meal, or how much we decrease our life span for having exposed ourselves to the increased radiation of the cosmos while at altitude flying to that meal?
I will gain nothing from an increase in retirement benefits or per diem rates or any other proviso in the next contract. But I think the per diem rates should be doubled at a bare minimum. What say you? And why and how do you arrive at your conclusion? If you choose the path of least resistance, we, the rickshaw wallahs will not benefit one iota. But if you increase hourly pay rates, solely, magically, ALPA becomes a beneficiary also. Should we allow ALPA a cut of our per diem so they are encouraged to fight for it at long last? Should we allow them a cut of our retirement so they fight for it at last?
If you are too busy playing to answer this for a while, I understand. I'll return to the rickshaw stand now.
08-26-2020 | 02:19 PM
#99
Banned
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 1,838
Likes: 0
I am very impressed by the accumulated knowledge of Not much Work and lots of time to Play and Post.
He/she/it/they is very well connected to information sources. Especially so for someone who is relatively recent on the scene, as I once was.
I happen to know how much pilots who are retiring under this contract are losing per year, because of the decision by some block reps of larger blocks to do a roll call vote rather than allow the new pilots to go onto a sole B-plan, albeit at a higher percentage than the old-timers. What do your information sources tell you?
As a purported relatively new hire, do you agree with their decision? Depending on your assumptions, or knowledge, pertaining to the longevity of our pilot group, which way would you have voted if you were on the MEC at the time?
And since you have access to a remarkable amount of information, what is our average lifespan after we retire? And how should that inform our per diem rates? Stated differently, is there any relationship between the number of hours we fly, and our longevity? Should our per diem be based on the price of a meal, or how much we decrease our life span for having exposed ourselves to the increased radiation of the cosmos while at altitude flying to that meal?
I will gain nothing from an increase in retirement benefits or per diem rates or any other proviso in the next contract. But I think the per diem rates should be doubled at a bare minimum. What say you? And why and how do you arrive at your conclusion? If you choose the path of least resistance, we, the rickshaw wallahs will not benefit one iota. But if you increase hourly pay rates, solely, magically, ALPA becomes a beneficiary also. Should we allow ALPA a cut of our per diem so they are encouraged to fight for it at long last? Should we allow them a cut of our retirement so they fight for it at last?
If you are too busy playing to answer this for a while, I understand. I'll return to the rickshaw stand now.
He/she/it/they is very well connected to information sources. Especially so for someone who is relatively recent on the scene, as I once was.
I happen to know how much pilots who are retiring under this contract are losing per year, because of the decision by some block reps of larger blocks to do a roll call vote rather than allow the new pilots to go onto a sole B-plan, albeit at a higher percentage than the old-timers. What do your information sources tell you?
As a purported relatively new hire, do you agree with their decision? Depending on your assumptions, or knowledge, pertaining to the longevity of our pilot group, which way would you have voted if you were on the MEC at the time?
And since you have access to a remarkable amount of information, what is our average lifespan after we retire? And how should that inform our per diem rates? Stated differently, is there any relationship between the number of hours we fly, and our longevity? Should our per diem be based on the price of a meal, or how much we decrease our life span for having exposed ourselves to the increased radiation of the cosmos while at altitude flying to that meal?
I will gain nothing from an increase in retirement benefits or per diem rates or any other proviso in the next contract. But I think the per diem rates should be doubled at a bare minimum. What say you? And why and how do you arrive at your conclusion? If you choose the path of least resistance, we, the rickshaw wallahs will not benefit one iota. But if you increase hourly pay rates, solely, magically, ALPA becomes a beneficiary also. Should we allow ALPA a cut of our per diem so they are encouraged to fight for it at long last? Should we allow them a cut of our retirement so they fight for it at last?
If you are too busy playing to answer this for a while, I understand. I'll return to the rickshaw stand now.
I have no beef with people doing draft currently however history proves most at this company don't turn the draft hose off when its needed. I sure hope they learned their lesson but I'm not holding my breath.
I honestly enjoy the perspectives many give on this page. It encourages critical thinking. I think what we have all learned is that we all have different ideas of what “improve retirement” means. I hope we all don't dig our heals in on only our idea of what that means because as I have learned we have numerous ways we can increase it.
08-26-2020 | 03:01 PM
#100
Line Holder
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,481
Likes: 23
From: Crewmember
I am open to improving the A plan.
I am open to improving the B plan.
I am not open to subscribing to the "pancake" method. I simply don't trust the union on this to get it right, and I don't think it is a good idea in the first place.
What good are my pancakes if the stock market crashes the week before I retire?
Give me a better A plan. Give me a better B plan. Cash over cap is a must!
Will the union listen? I doubt it. They say they don't even monitor these pages, which they should, IMHO.
All I can hope for is a 100% survey of the crew force. Anything less is unacceptable.
I am open to improving the B plan.
I am not open to subscribing to the "pancake" method. I simply don't trust the union on this to get it right, and I don't think it is a good idea in the first place.
What good are my pancakes if the stock market crashes the week before I retire?
Give me a better A plan. Give me a better B plan. Cash over cap is a must!
Will the union listen? I doubt it. They say they don't even monitor these pages, which they should, IMHO.
All I can hope for is a 100% survey of the crew force. Anything less is unacceptable.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
