A lot of questions being asked and statements that have been addressed numerous times in information we have received. Its all on youtube.

These ones are from 2018.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29uiHDWZgi8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LvjGtv6POFM

Also many of these are answered in the new videos, I think 6 in total, that I received in emails and can also be found on youtube.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_QHYEYvDI0

For those willing to read and listen the information is out their.

You don’t even have to be a FedEx pilot to become educated on the subject since it’s all public. Now most wouldn’t waste the time because they don’t currently have a pension.

So are all these guys lying to us? Is this one big cover-up? Are all these outside experts big dummies? Are our own pilots who are under the same retirement plan gonna negotiate something worse? The outside consultants are lying to us? I guess I’m just one big sucker who is being lied to by numerous people for being willing to look at something different.

 

First to be straight, ALPA did not negotiate our current A fund. We had it before they came on property, as was our vacation and sick system.
Second, yes the consultants flat out lied to us, they premised their first video by saying we were at an equilibrium of active pilots to retirees. Um, no, when I called my rep and asked how many pilots we had out on retirement, 3 different ones hadn't a clue. Shouldn't that be a critical known? With my own research I found it closer to 5-1 ratio active to retiree. We have a variable pension plan that we can manipulate with as much or little risk as we want, it's called the B fund. Like the man said...snake oil.

 

Ask these questions:

Who has anything to gain from this new plan? Maybe the outside experts?
So great a plan so who else has this plan? Baseball players, but their plan is significantly different with a large fixed payout and they make millions. Anyone else?

Did you look at the pay rate assumptions in those videos? If you think those are realistic I will have some of what you and ALPA are smoking.

 

I did look at the pay rate assumption and to be uber conservative I ran the numbers for current pay rates and for the assumed pay rates and took the average.

Once again you made a statement that has been proven false. Those consultants are paid on a fixed fee and are not on a contract to gain if or when we would make the change. This was covered in the hub turn meetings in 2018 and the education material. I specifically remember this being addressed. A certain “loud voice” on JF asked this question to the consultants in a hub turn meeting and it was squashed. Now once again we could say they all lied to us.

So ask this, what was the max Capt pay rate 20 years ago? What is it today? Guess what. Its about a 2.5% increase annually.

 

Sorry, but it is massively difficult to get the company to agree to a higher amount because of how they have to ensure is funded. We need a better system that grows itself. Negotiating for only a flat increase is a loser over time.

 

As a 4 year guy with God willing 23 more to go until retirement, I find the stabilized pension model as a better solution than a 3% year over year loss to the current A Plan. However, it's all predicated on the numbers, but speaking generally the concept of a stabilized plan versus a decreasing return on our current pension is better IMO.

I understand my opinion is predicated on how much time I have left versus someone closer to retirement. That's to be expected.

What I don't want to see is lumping our two different retirement buckets into one bucket with an increased B Plan with cash over cap. It's a lot easier to negotiate a larger retirement when negotiating from two different angles.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

I will check out the videos again.

nowork - please please name one company that uses this type of DB plan and I will look at its fund literature or prospectus and show you how different it is. I am genuinely asking because this appears to be a unicorn plan.

Blue - how in the heckfire can this new stabilized fund scheme be considered a DB plan and invest in the same instruments as our current A fund yet have such radically different funding requirements per ERISA/PBGC? It’s like a real DB fund except that regulations don’t apply to it or (my guess) protect it!

 

These plans are different because the laws changed in 2006. Remember our current A plan was written under a different set of funding laws (also covered in the material). This is why our current pension has such a high liability cost. This was all covered in the material. Stay stuck in the past and your retirement will be left in the past. The union named a few organization that used a similar plan such as MLB. These plans are made to be tailored which is why its not a one size fits all.

Read and listen to the material and literally all these questions and conjecture are addressed.

So for the crowd that say lets just increase what we have, that sounds great. So lets say we increase the cap to 300. Awesome. Then you ask, well how long did that take? The answer is more than 20 years and 2 full bargaining cycles and one CBA extension. So how long would it take to improve the next one? Do you really want to stick to a plan that you have to negotiate for every cycle and have had no success on increasing? Well if you have one foot out the door you would love this because the group bailed you out on the way out the door. However, for those that have numerous years to go we are left holding the bag to constantly try to increase a pension that has had no movement up to this point.

 

MLB is a flat out lie and been covered here before. They have a two component pension made up of a fixed fund which is our traditional plan funded by contributions by each team and is roughly 80% of their total pension. Then they have a variable plan COMPONENT which earns returns like a mutual fund each year and CAN BE NEGATIVE FOR THE YEAR AND IS ONLY 20% of their total pension.

The lies about MLB pensions and other high wage earners being in this proposed fund is complete garbage.

read for yourself and quit peddling fake news it takes about 2 seconds:

http://www.mlb.com/mlb/official_info...sion-print.pdf

Once again - i challenge you to show me any DB fund at all similar to what we have been fed here. I triple dog dare you. It doesn’t exist. Just because it was on a PowerPoint from our union doesn’t mean it is correct.

living in the past is sometimes the right move.

I’ll be waiting for those company names to do some research since this plan is apparently very popular and I hope to be proven wrong by your examples. Thank you in advance.

 

What about tying the FAE limit to the 401(a)(17) - Qualified Plan Compensation Limit?