What would you have to contribute yearly at a 7% ROR for 25 years to get an annuity worth $130 per year for 15 years?

We currently have an 8% B fund.

So how much per year would you have to make to so that 9% equalled that yearly contribution?

If you do get cash over cap, how much would you need to cover the taxes on that cash over cap?

 

I'm really thinking about new hires. Again, the variables are endless here. How old are you when you got hired? How long will you live? What are market returns? Will Fedex be here when you retire? Bankruptcy? Good to have the conversation though...

 

Any offers they (you mean the company right?) want to talk about, will be in the company's best interest, not in ours. Do you really think otherwise???Negotiations are over.

 

I honestly do understand why anybody would entertain the idea of giving up a pension, especially during great times for the company. It shouldn't even be a thought and giving a listening ear to any thought of it could send a wrong message. Six years away from negotiation and already people are talking about it. And to those who think that not getting PBS and keeping your retirement is a gain you're sadly mistaken. How can you gain what you already had by giving up something else.

 

You would have to average $290k per year at a 7% market return for a 25 year career for a 17% B fund to equal our current plans. That doesn't even consider any tax implications for cash over cap.

How many years do you have to work until you make $290K? Would you ever be able to catch up for the years you weren't even close to $290K

Well, maybe if we get PBS and the company schedules all of us for min days off, you could get there faster. That's an incentive.:roll eyes:

 

FWIW, the vacation change on vto's is only a request to burn more vacation than scheduled. It will only be approved if they don't need you. Good luck with that.

 

Negotiations never end. Don't kid yourself. We should have handled this with this contract but we folded. It's not the last you'll hear about retirement, but you are right, we lost our chance to use any leverage we might have had...

 

So, if you are 30 and just hired, what choice would you make? Take the 17% or gamble that your 130k (less survivor benefit if you go that route) will be there in 30-35 years? Again, it'd only consider cash over cap. I think 290k is a very low figure. Not sure if 290k is an accurate estimate, but even getting 3% raises, I'd say $290k average for a new hire is beyond attainable.

I'm not in favor of giving a damn thing up. But, in our very noble attempt to not screw over new hires, we may have done just that. I've asked several new hires what they'd rather have, and they all said a higher B fund. That's no scientific study, as I'm sure a great many would prefer the A fund. Don't get me wrong, I totally agreed that we keep them on the plan. That assumed that we'd get a significant A fund bump though. If I were a 30 year old new hire, I'd take the larger B fund. If I was a 50 year old new hire, I'd probably want the A fund. That's just me, I'm sure others in the exact same situation would choose the opposite. Many of us have lost a pension already, so we are a little gun shy.

30 years is a lot of time in a business cycle. We all know of hundreds of businesses that seemed strong at one time but failed later. Fedex isn't immune to bankruptcy or failure.

 

In my view, ANY negotiating outside of Section 6, without even considering the phenomenal leverage we had (and were mostly excersising), would be FOOLISH = less golfing, more flying.

 

Thread drifting out of the stadium. Oh well ... carry on.