Do you have any good reason to talk to people like this?

IAPF.............hmmm..........International Anti Poaching Foundation. Now that's funny. Or is it some obscure financial place based in Ireland, that offers different kinds of pension schemes? What kind of scheming was there to post this PDF? Why was this offered up? and who is the person who offered it up? and what motivations did this person have? In a world of almost unlimited information and ease of access information, why can't anyone spend 3 minutes educating themselves? The A plan has suffered catastrophic reductions? Really? from what? the only reduction has been purchasing power due to inflation. And only that. I do not trivialize this issue, but to assign the reduction to something else is abject misrepresentation. Has the A plan kept up with our increase in pay? No. But that is not a reduction, that is a failure to improve the A plan as it relates to overall pay. And where does that responsibility lie? When I got here, there was no B plan of significance, just $500. That isn't the case anymore. If we are going to talk about income replacement, then, objectively all dollars from the company in the B plan and it's market gains have to be factored in as part of your income replacement argument. Also, at what point should any of us demonstrate some self responsibility? That is, above and beyond whatever you get in the A and the B plan, shouldn't you be saving on your own too? But, go do draft, get your $200k/mo, blow the money on the next bigger house, boat, Lambo with gold lug nuts, beach house, light twin, next ex with bigger hooters, etc etc. Half the posters on this thread scream MGMT to me.

Wrong!
 

I have spoken with several block reps and SMEs. The pancake plan underwent some minor modifications, and was re-named the PSPP. Almost the exact same plan, with a different name. YES, THE PSPP IS STILL ON THE TABLE! Within the MEC and NC there is strong support for it. Blind trust in the NC is foolish. Trust is earned. MEC and NC would have a lot more support if they communicate d clearly and often. Ask your rep if the Company has offered to increase the FAE. If they give you a straight answer, you might be surprised what they tell you.

"I trust the negotiating committee"

This is the exact wrong mentality and it is one that pervades amongst this body. It is a Top down thinking and directives where we'll tell you what's best for you and you'll like it. Be real concerned when people who think like this park themselves in positions to make decisions for you. That's the kind of hubris that allows them to "negotiate" terms of a significant section of the CBA outside of section 6. Then add leading survey questions to gain endorsement of the same repackaged garbage. If there's mistrust it is well earned. Anyone who's good with trusting that process or those players is not someone I'm gonna spend one moment listening to and neither should you.

Voting down a TA isn't some kind of uninformed gamesmanship. It is a reaction to a process driven by the forementioned methodology. It is the only opportunity the rank and file has to resoundingly reject that mindset and clearly communicate that it is unacceptable.

We need to reimagine what is possible. Stop being willing to limit your expectations because someone says the NMB will think unfavorably if our desires seem (to them) unreasonable. If someone can tell you what a mediator will think or do in the future they're clearly wasting their talents flying airplanes.

The company wants retirement era everything.

So you have a better way? Its a representative organization like almost all big organizations. Should we allow all 5,800 pilots to negotiate on their own behalf? We get to give inputs through surveys, DARTS, resolutions, PUB calls, in-person events and contact with representatives. If you choose to not do those things thats your fault.

If you want a larger role to play then run for those elected positions (and win) or volunteer for the committees. If you don’t want those larger roles then you get to be a regular member. I enjoy just being a member and am damn glad many step up to volunteer. Especially knowing we have a few know-it-alls that love to micromanage and arm chair quarterback from the sidelines.

I meant to say that the company wants bankruptcy era everything.

Bottom line for me is this: If we're not gonna fix the A plan then I'd prefer a LARGE bump to the B plan over any PSPP or other b.s. If I'm not gonna have an A plan, then I should decide how my retirement money is managed. No half-measures.

That said, a higher FAE cap is and has always been the right answer.

Before anyone tells me that I don't know enough about the PSPP to have this position, I'd say to you that is the entirety of the issue (it doesn't actually exist).

History shows (repeatedly) that whatever a PSPP is, if it's in a TA, it will be paraded around like a newborn child. It will be promoted tenaciously to the 50% of our crew force that hasn't seen this act before. Any dissent will be squashed. That's how it goes every time around here. Our MEC's/NC's get married to their first TA every time and it's passage becomes personal. I hope they prove me wrong.

The MEC/NC loves pancakes!

The great part is you get the same amount of input as everyone. One vote. With 5,800 pilots we are not subcontractors. We don’t bargain for ourselves. This is a good thing because rest assured many would do this job for much less. Thats why we have a union and we all have the same amount of input and power. Historically this has worked out substantially better than none union airlines.