I agree that a well negotiated B Fund/ 401K is a better deal in that it can't be taken away. The whole key here is "well negotiated."

As Paul Harvey used to say, "stand by for news."

 

2.

If you think AMR can stay out of bankruptcy for the rest of your life, have fun with your A plan. I'll take a 20% B or a healthy 401K match over promised money any day.

 

I wonder if this will improve the recall acceptance rate ?

 

What if AMR did not create Eagle. Do these FO's mentioned above think they would not have been furloughed? They still would have got a pink slip, and some other regional would have filled the gap. Sad but true.

It is always the eagle guys fault. Is it that pilot groups fault that AMR created them? Could Eagle pilots or APA have stopped the furlough, or the AA flying going to some regional? NO..

My point is... why are pilots always blaming other pilots and then wanting to punish other pilots. Wake up. Punish those who make the business decisions. The company.

Management wants us to blame and punish one another. We (pilots) are our own worst enemy. Wake up.

 

That is precisely my point. But there are a lot of folks on this forum and others that are screaming it's the new "B" scale at AA. As I stated in an earlier post, the "A" plan only provides about a third of a pilots retirement, which makes it much smaller than plans that were terminated at DAL and UAL. Furthermore, it's funded to 100%, in fact it was funded to 142% 2 years ago, and 120% last year. AMR has made zero contributions to the plan for almost 3 years. On top of that, if the plan assets return 9% annually, AMR will never have to make a contribution. However, if new hires start coming in, the picture changes, since the plan assets will have to increase proportionally.

In my personal case, should the plan be terminated and the PBGC were to start paying my benefit, I expect my loss to be on the order of 10 to 20% annually. That's a far cry from the 80K to 100K our UAL and DAL brothers have suffered.

The question that must be answered is how big a contribution to a 401K match or "B" plan is needed to replace the "A" plan. My guess is not much, and because of that, there will be the perception that it's a new "B" scale.

 

Again: I'm only repeating what I've read, not advocating it. In a prefect world we would all get along and go skipping down the sidewalk hand in hand.

Perception is reality, the point is that a great number of our furloughed pilots believe that AE was levered against them, we lost the 7300 floor arbitration, along with a lot of other arbitrations that have adversely effected the AA pilot group. Now all of a sudden a guy with 300 hours of flying time hired between now and October 11, 2011 is guaranteed a job at AA with no interview or physical. Kind of makes us upset a little.

On the upside, I received a text from the union boss in ORD. It said to "welcome them aboard". It left me wondering what's really going on?

 

I know you are not advocating it. I was just venting. The turn of the industry was is pretty much out of our control. Although there are some things that can be done by us.

Like you said "AE was levered against them". It was the company that negotiated the scope not AE pilots.

Another thing. I know several AA pilots who have children that fly for AE with hope to get to AA like their dad.

It was not my intent to take AA flying. I wanted to get the time I needed so I could work along the side of AA pilots at AA. I worked for AA on the ramp. If AA would have hired me straight to AA as a pilot I would have. That was never an option for anyone and we all know that.

Again, just venting. I am not aiming these comments to you Oldfreightdawg.

 

Well stated.

10 years of furlough, now this?

 

I know the men who have children at Eagle and I wish them well. No hard feelings. See you on the line.

OFD

 

Not quite: see below,


As of January 1, 2010, the AFN indicates the funded level of the A Plan is 96.44%. This
compares with funded levels of 142% in 2008 and 104% in 2009. This decline in the funded
level can be attributed to the following factors:
· The January 2008 figure was artificially high due to the change in the mandatory
retirement age, accompanied with an increase in the discount rate used to calculate the
present value of the benefits earned under the plan.
· The high funded levels for IRC purposes in 2008 and 2009 meant that no A Plan
contributions were required for those plan years, nor were any made.
· Because additional pension benefits are being earned each year, and because previously
accrued benefits move “one year closer to being paid,” there is a natural tendency for the
funded level to decrease unless contributions are made to the plan. This tendency was
counteracted to some extent in the January 2010 figure by above average asset returns in
2009.
Because the plan was underfunded in 2010, a contribution will be required for the 2010 plan
year. This contribution will not be due until September of 2011. Required contributions for the
2011 plan year will have to be made quarterly, so the first one should have been made last
month.