[QUOTE=MaydayMark;1955090]How about if you folks take a deep breath, wait 2 weeks until you can actually read the TA and then ...

... give us all your reasons for voting one way or the other.

Trust me when I say that I know there were things in the old Contract that needed to be fixed. Conversations with the NC and my ALPA Reps made me think that they understood that also. Maybe, just maybe, they did a really good job?

Despite all the rumors, I don't yet think we have enough information to decide how to vote YET!*?


[/QUOTE

Have to agree.

+1

 

The "the limitation on the annual benefit under a defined benefit plan under Section 415(b)(1)(A)" is not the "cap" we're talking about. For 2015, that's $210,000 for 2015 (same link that you provided).

The "cap" we want raised is the CBA cap on the Final Average Earnings used to compute retirement compensation under the A-plan. The basic formula is FAE * 2% * YOS, with a maximum of 25 YOS (Years of Service) and an FAE cap of $260,000. That limits retirement earnings (the annual benefit) to 50% of the cap, or $130,000. We're nowhere near the IRS limit yet.






.

 

I disagree.

Consider two pilots who fly their BLG and little extra. One is close to retirement, and one is 10 years away. The one close to retirement has put together a FAE of 270,000, but it's currently capped at $260,000. The most he can expect to benefit from raising the cap to 300,000 (for example) is a $5,000 annual benefit in retirement.

On the other hand, the pilot with 10 years to go will enjoy the higher pay rates associated with the new CBA over the next 10 years, and he will likely build a much higher FAE, maybe even up to the $300,000 limit. His improvement in the annual retirement benefit could be as much as $15,000 annually, or $1,250 per month.

The pilot close to retirement will have few options to improve his FAE, while the pilot with many years to go will have numerous opportunities to take advantage of the lifted cap.

Or ...


A more realistic perspective might be the pilot with years to go before retirement will have an opportunity to protect the current value of his retirement benefit from the erosion of inflation.


Benefit both groups equally? The point of a retirement plan to to achieve a retirement benefit, specifically a retirement income. What provides the income in a B plan is the growth of the securities purchased. A pilot who receives a B plan contribution today and attempts to live off the profits tomorrow won't live very long. Yes, the contributions are equal, percentage-wise, but the value in terms of retirement income is much greater for the pilot with many years to go before he starts withdrawing.




Absolutely! Improvements to both the A Plan and the B Plan is in the best interest of ALL pilots, but especially to the pilots who have many years until retirement.






.

 

I'm not saying that I'm deciding how to vote right now -- I'm saying that a 15% hourly bump is what it will take to get me to read it at all!

Pipe

 

Is there a possibility that the numbers "floated" are to lower our expectations?

If the TA comes back with 18% on year 1, wouldn't it psychologically help most (62%) to "glaze over" the remaining CBA language, specially if they were expecting half of that increase?

Pay rate is a huge player for me, but there are many other things I know we have earned by working as hard as we do for such a profitable company: improvements to both the the A-plan AND B-plan, some improvement to 4a2b language, DP's, accepted fares, reserve/overall CRS transparency, no significant increase to insurance, proper compensation for pairing revision, among others. I'm not expecting to see 100% of these things addressed, but even a 20% increase on year 1 would not at all guarantee a YES vote for me. We will be living and breathing under this contract for the next 8+ years!

I love my job here and I am happy to do the hard work that is required of us - knowing fully well we have earned an industry leading contract that is as far above the pax carrier's contracts as our company's profits have been for the last 15 years.

We shall know soon enough...and then the discussion here will get really interesting.

Disclosure- I have zero inside knowledge. Just don't want to fall for a hypothetical shiny 18% bump - without the other very important QOL issues addressed. Just IMHO.

 

^^+1

In particular, I was also wondering about your speculation of, "Is there a possibility that the numbers "floated" are to lower our expectations?

If the TA comes back with 18% on year 1, wouldn't it psychologically help most (62%) to "glaze over" the remaining CBA language, specially if they were expecting half of that increase?"

Guess we'll see soon enough, but that seems like a possibility.

 

You are putting WAY too much thought into this. I really wouldn't count on that higher number. When have you known the company to make a "reasonable" offer. The Hong Kong deal should have told you what they think we are worth. They offered us enough money for a mattress, boom box and some Ramen: a college student deal at best. Set the bar low and you should be right on target with what the lawyers and bean counters have calculated we will bite on.

 

$310 an Hour in 2015. Then 3% thereafter. So 17% now!! MINIMUM!

FUPM-

*youpayme.

 

+1

Don't forget that was also supposed to be enough for Paris.

 

Yet they filled the left seat and manned the right at 70% with the first deal and just hired to fill the rest. Quite a few of the no votes didn't back up their vote by not bidding it.