ALPA wants unity as we approach openers and negotiations, yet they plan to continue to pursue something the majority of the pilot group is adamantly against. Are they deaf? I can’t and won’t wear this pin they’ve mailed me if they can’t be transparent and listen to what the majority of my peers have said. I’ve told my reps where I stand, but clearly they’ve been brainwashed and don’t care about what their constituents want and plan to support what the MEC officers think is best. You can find my pin down at the dump.

I’m thinking of having a NO PSPP button made to wear instead.
It’ll be plain and simple, circular button with PSPP and a line through it.

Already told my LEC and the MEC I will not wear the pin as long as the PSPP is being pursued. Period!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I was just looking at the cost for a thousand "NO PSPP" lanyards. I'd buy them on my own money but I wonder if people would wear them?

Sign me up - I’d buy one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Make that two.

I Suggest one side says the previously mentioned ‘My MEC speaks for My MEC’ the other ‘NO PSPP’

I’m in!

It’s beyond belief to me that the Union who is supposed to represent our pilot group seems to have decided they know what’s best for us despite what the vast majority wants, and are hell bent on ramming pancakes down our throats. “You’ll eat pancakes and you will like them because we say so!”

I have not flown with a single person who supports this scheme. I just don’t get how a few individuals (insert PM here) can totally ignore the desires of the thousands they are supposed to represent, and just pursue their own agenda. I realize we all get a vote in the end, but the disconnect between ALPA leadership and its membership is beyond belief. What am I missing?!?!

First off, I think everyone know where I stand on this issue.

Sunny1 asked what he/she was missing, in short, accountability. No one seems to hold the reps accountable, ie fire them if they are not working for us. Everyone loves to complain on the crewbus, but when it comes to "doing" something about it, few show up and are counted. Remember, the vote was unanimous, all fifteen reps voted for the openers.

The one thing I am waiting for is 5 May when the MEC shows us the openers. I'll read them, I'll ask questions to ensure understanding, and then I'll decide how I feel about them and what I am going to do. If I like them I'll wear any pin they give me, I participate in the meetings, and calls. If I don't, I make sure my reps hear from me directly, and I'll get my own pin. I'll ask around how others feel and if the members don't like the way things are going, I'll work to replace any rep who is not listening to the members. I have said it before and I'll say it again, not on my watch. Not without a challenge.

I’m not for the PSPP or whatever breakfast meal it’s called, but I’ll stop short of saying the majority of pilots don’t want it.

I think it’s much closer than I think. The most vocal at people who aren’t for it.

Hell I had a captain flat out tell me he’d vote in PBS if it meant he got increased retirement. Since he wouldn’t have to live with the system for long (they had 25+ longevity)

There is a population out there who are not only content to eat the seed corn, but to auction off the farm on their way out the door. But honestly between selling scope in the 90s through the age 65 deal, they have been pulling the ladder up behind them my entire career.

Here we go. The NEW false narrative. I saw it coming in the MEC Chairman's April 23rd message.

First, he used the "try to confuse them" tactic I spoke of in my Council 26 Message - Unpublished. He begins by referring to "the multiple formulas used to compute [the] defined benefit." As I explained in my message, 2 of the formulas involve additional multipliers from the 1999 and 2006 CBAs which applied to specific age and longevity groups. The 2006 multipliers don't apply to anyone who hasn't retired already, and I'll be surprised if anybody to whom the the 1999 multipliers applied will not have retired by the time we get a new CBA. Then there's a small group remaining of former Flying Tiger pilots -- they know who they are, and they may also be gone before we get a new CBA. That leaves the basic formula, and the Flat Dollar benefit. In no case would the Flat Dollar benefit reduce the benefit calculated with the basic formula: 2% times Years of Service times High Five. Sorry, Dave, it's not that complicated that you can scare us away from it.

Then, he closes by saying, "The Contract 2021 Opener will address members’ concerns by providing a secure and durable retirement package that improves retirement income for all pilots using both defined benefit and defined contribution plans." You might think that means that the MEC along with the Negotiating Committee and the Officers have officially abandoned their pursuit of a variable benefit plan. They've finally decided to listen to the hue and cry of the membership and are now committed to fixing our Defined Benefit Plan. Not so fast.

All they're doing is trying to convince us that the Variable Benefit Plan is actually a Defined Benefit Plan. IT. IS. NOT.

So, back to Kronan's initial assertion: The PSPP is a pension plan. True, In layman's terms, and leaning on Webster for a definition, the PSPP does indeed provide "a fixed sum paid regularly to a person." The hitch is that the sum is determined by variables, some of which the pilot has no way to control. Thus, the term variable.

A pilot beginning a career under such a variable plan will not know when he can progress from one seat to a higher paying seat, he will not know what the BLGs will be from month to month or how much extra flying will be available to him. He also won't know how the stock market, or more specifically the retirement fund, will perform from year to year. So, he won't know what his income will be in any year, or what the value of "pancakes" will be that year, so he won't know how many pancakes he will accrue in any year. Most importantly, he won't know the value of all of his pancakes until the year he retires, so he won't know what that "sum paid regularly" will be until he has already begun his last year of employment. Under the "fly 'til you die or one more peak" bonus plan we have now for pilots who announce their retirement in advance in order to receive an extra bonus, he will have already announced his retirement before he will know what his retirement benefit will be. At that point, if he changes his mind, he'll have to forfeit the bonus.

That's not what a defined benefit is.

A Defined Benefit is when a newhire pilot knows that he can retire at age 60 and after 25 years of service with 50% of his High Five.

Let's take a different look at the logic.

A cat is a feline. A feline is a mammal.

A dog is a canine. A canine is a mammal.

To say that because a dog is a mammal, it is also a feline is absurd. Logic doesn't work that way.

Our "A" Plan is a Defined Benefit plan. A Defined Benefit plan is a pension plan.

The PSPP is a Variable Benefit plan. A Variable Benefit plan is a pension plan.

To say that because a PSPP is a pension plan, it is also a Defined Benefit plan is absurd.


Next they'll try to tell us it's the ACCRUAL that is variable, not the benefit, so it's not a Variable Benefit plan, it's a Variable Accrual plan, which is a Defined Benefit plan.

Yes, they think we are that stupid.

We can't wait until there's a TA we will reject. That's a waste of time, and a disservice to everyone who must retire before then. There needs to be a house cleaning.






.