USMCFDX

Again I agree with you 100%. The issue I have is RLG is not 1000 hours and you cherry picked the highest RLG airplane we have. This is exactly what ALPA is doing and it is wrong.

FastBurner

The answer regarding 1,000 hours has been bastardized by Cheiron and union. I linked some examples of variable plans on my website.
https://fedexpilotretirement.wordpre...ble-plan-info/

The following shows the local 26 variable benefit (by cheiron) using 1,000 work hours (1/2 of normal work year) to be eligible for 60% of benefits for that year.
A438264B-10E7-4A30-A7A6-F602BCBA92D8.jpg
http://www.local26.org/wp-content/up...pdated2013.pdf

Other plans (linked on site) show similar graduated benefits using 1,000 hours as a basis for variable benefit accrual. The point is that 1,000 hrs to Cheiron (originally) is not 1,000 (credit hours) to us. If, by chance, the 1,000 hours complied with Pilot Benefit Book and we received 95 hrs credit per pay period, essentially giving us “Credit” for time employed, then PSPP might be a good deal for us. But, it’s all tied to pay (in every video and written example) using 1,000 CH (pay) as basis. That is ONE of the many flaws of modeler and Cheiron plan, specifically because CBA Min BLG is 884/yr.

As has been said many times, the ability to meet high 5 over ANY time period guarantees full benefit currently. Under PSPP, every year counts.

Hopefully this gives perspective Cheiron’s use of 1,000 hrs in modeler.

Noworkallplay

So why are most pilots working so hard the way the system is currently set up?? They get no pension credit for making more than 260k, yet most still work extra consistently. We get no credit for YOS over 25 years, but most stay well after. We have no pension penalty for retirement after 60, yet most stay well after 60 even with 25 YOS. So with our current system why are all these things true? By answering these questions above you will completely defunct the argument you just made that a "new calculation" would insensitive pilots to do what they are already doing. False premise argument at its core. Does not match what we do as pilots currently.

To me what the new calculation would do is give you credit for the work you are already doing. It will give you credit for the YOS that the current calculation does not.It doesn't change what most are already doing......

StarClipper

I still don’t understand how can anyone in their right mind, justify or support this POS plan.

TonyC

There were reports, also known as rumors, of conversations or proposals during the 2015 CBA negotiations that involved raising the CBA FAE Cap for current pilots and going to an ALL-"B" Plan scheme for new hires. Such a path would create two separate groups in the future, the "Haves" and the "Have nots" in terms of a PENSION. I can think of (and have articulated in the past) a number of reasons why that would be a bad idea. However, if it is (was) true, it highlights the fact The Company is not opposed in principal to fixing the current "A" Plan by raising the Cap, they're just opposed to doing it for everybody. Union Busting 101 - Divide and Conquer.

There are new reports, also known as rumors, of similar offers The Company is prepared to make. Of course, there are always people who know people who are "in the know" or "would know" or have been good sources in the past who are eager to show how they know more than the average line pilot and are happy to help The Company spread reports, also known as rumors, directly to the pilots to confuse, and again, divide and conquer. The second Union Busting 101 tactic - Direct Dealing with members.

Whether true or not, we need to remain focused on the primary goal -- Fix the "A" Plan to provide a 50% income replacement pension without having to work harder or longer to get it.



Status quo requires that we don't change the way we work, and The Company doesn't change the rules that we work under.

You're free to do whatever you want, and whatever is allowed by the CBA, just like you have been all along. However, you cannot try to influence your peers' choices. To do so might be considered an illegal job action and a violation of the status quo requirement, and it could be considered creating a hostile workplace, an action for which you could be terminated.

The "Union" will never "send a message" trying to influence anyone's choices or behaviors, other than to comply strictly with the CBA and the RLA. Anything other than that would most certainly result in The Company going to Federal Court to obtain an injunction against such actions, and the penalties for doing so could literally cripple our ability to negotiate effectively, or maybe even to exist as a union.

Stay informed, stay legal, don't look for a "signal" to do anything different.


You're assuming they're entering the venue in an upright position in order to roll over. If they're going in pushing the pancake plan, they're already in the wrong posture.


It's never good to pick a subset of the membership and point the finger of blame at them. Again, not smart to create a hostile work environment.

Flex instructors are already feeling pressure to contribute more productivity by working a certain number of days per month for two events on the same day. They get to volunteer to do it, but they don't get to choose the days or the events. Think about that when your career is on the line with that Sim event that starts late in the evening and your seat support has been working since early in the morning.

Our Flex Instructors and LCAs do good work for us -- it's important that we include them, not blame them.






.

TonyC

I've debunked this rationalization several times before, I don't mind doing it again. The second false narrative (the 1st one is, "The Company has always said 'No' to raising the FAE Cap") is that pilots are already working beyond the Normal Retirement Age of 60, so this won't make them work longer.

Why are they working harder and longer? 4 reasons, and they're all the Union's fault (in the first case, FPA, and in the next two, ALPA)

1) Disability Sick bank excess contributions to the "B" Fund. We know that a pilot who never uses sick leave will eventually have enough hours in his Disability Sick account that further additions result in more money in the Defined Contribution plan, otherwise known as our "B" Plan. Sometimes our Greed overpowers our Smart, and we wind up working sick, or even flying Makeup Sick in order to get those pennies in our "B" Plan. It is an incentive to work harder. FPA Fail.

2) The cost of Retiree Health Care Insurance from Age 60 to Age 65. Our 2006 CBA addressed this issue which stood as an obstacle to retirement at the Normal Retirement Age of 60 by creating a VEBA (Voluntary Employees' Benefit Association) to provide money to offset the exorbitant cost of health care insurance prior to reaching Medicare eligibility. This VEBA was only for a select age and seniority band of pilots who were expected to retire during the "life" of that CBA (in other words, until the next CBA could address the next age band). While there were many pilots who received the benefit and did NOT retire at Age 60, the fact is it removed that obstacle to retirement, and many pilots took advantage of it.

When the 2011/2015 CBAs (I think if them as a single process) failed to address this issue for the "next" wave of potential retirees, it effectively put that obstacle back up for pilots to consider before retiring. What had been fixed in 2006 was neglected and remains broken even today. Once again, the cost of retiree health care insurance between the Normal Retirement Age of 60 and Medicare eligibility at 65 is a LARGE obstacle to retirement at Age 60. ALPA Fail.

3) Fly 'til you Die, or One More Peak. The 2015 CBA created an incentive for pilots to announce their retirement date at least 1 year ahead of time. Such announcements allow The Company to better plan for hiring and training to smooth their manning levels. It also helps them keep manning levels up through peak by requiring that such retirements occur ONLY on December 31st after the pilot's 60th birthday, OR during the month of his 65th birthday. The dollar amount is less than half of his sick bank (another incentive to save the sick time), but it's enough to entice many pilots to participate. No pilot can announce his retirement to occur on his 60th birthday and receive this bonus unless his birthday falls on December 31st. Let me repeat that. A pilot cannot retire at the normal retirement age, his 60th birthday, and receive this bonus, unless his birthday is the 31st of December. This "feature", negotiated in to our 2015 CBA, is both an obstacle to retiring AT the Normal Retirement age, and in incentive to working beyond. ALPA FAIL

4) We have failed to maintain the 50% Income Replacement value of our "A" Plan. The pension that we have planned on receiving from our "A" Plan was designed to provide a specific, defined benefit for the lifetime of the retiree and spouse. With the current FAE Cap, that pension is not currently possible. In order to achieve the same income replacement, the pilot has a few options, and they all involve working harder and/or longer. More income tucked away requires working harder and/or longer. More contributions to the "B" fund requires working harder and/or longer. Waiting for a new CBA with improved retirement benefits requires working longer. All of these are incentives to work harder and/or longer. Again, ALPA FAIL.

Don't get me wrong here. When I say FPA FAIL or ALPA FAIL, I refer to all of us, not just some select individuals who spend a lot of time on Kirby. All of those CBAs were ratified by the membership. We have created the problems, the obstacles, the incentives. And we cannot ignore them. Ignoring them won't justify compounding them.


So, to justify creating incentives to work harder and longer by observing that pilots are working harder and longer without acknowledging that we have ourselves created incentives and obstacles to influence that behavior is faulty, circular reasoning.


A longtime mantra of retirement negotiations has been Create NO OBSTACLES to Normal Retirement, and NO INCENTIVES to working longer.

Junior pilots should be DEVOTED to maintaining this foundational principle because it promotes faster progression in seniority and more new hires. Why our Collective Bargaining Agent would be proposing anything that contradicts it baffles me.

Past failures should not justify our attempts to fail again.






.

BrianH

Very well said, foundational to the issues.

I agree completely.

MEMA300

Ive heard rumors about company kicking up A plan amount also. But what do we have to give for it is the question.


Tony, most of us are convinced but how do we get our leadership on board. Ive tried phone calls and emails and am usually met with harsh resistance.

HooverPilot

What he said.

I’ve emailed my reps and sent DARTS, but then I get sales job phone calls or a Brush off email telling me I don’t understand.

TonyC

A little personal sacrifice of time.

As far as the negotiations with The Company goes, this should not be considered a "zero sum" game where we have to give up something they want to get something we want. The Company has enjoyed 23 years of not improving our "A" Plan, and that's no small prize. Too many pilots have now retired with a reduced pension, being forced to sacrifice more and more each year as the gap between the benefit and a 50% pension has grown, and we don't owe The Company another sacrifice to restore the "A" Plan to what it should be.

But they're not going to just hand it to us. We are going to have to demonstrate that we are dead serious about requiring a fix to our "A" Plan. Each of us will need to make the effort to contact our Local Council Reps to make our positions known. We need to take the time and make the effort to show up at Local Council Meetings when they start up again. When Hub Turn meetings resume, we need to leave our sleep rooms for a little while and flood the TV room and let the MEC Officers know we're NOT on board with giving away our "A" Plan, and we are willing to fight to get the "A" Plan improvements we deserve and that we are owed. We will need to give up our free time to pick up picket signs and walk sidewalks to demonstrate our will and determination to get this fixed.

It will take personal sacrifice of our time, but it will be such a small sacrifice in comparison to the reward.


ALPA is supposed to be a ground up organization, driven by its members. We each have the power of a single vote. If we cannot change the minds of the people elected to represent us, we may be compelled to change the people who represent us.

My Local Council Reps have not responded to my last e-mail to them asking them what is meant by the term "Defined Benefit" in the Openers Document they endorsed. They can continue to ignore me and refuse to answer, but they cannot ignore the submission of a meeting agenda item to recall them.






.