Quote:
The discussion should be how can the pilot retirement plan be tied into managements retirement plan.
It already is. The Defined Benefit fund is the same for both.Originally Posted by StarClipper
The discussion should be how can the pilot retirement plan be tied into managements retirement plan.
Quote:
Pension plan is funded.
Overfunded, in fact.Originally Posted by kronan
Pension plan is funded.
Quote:
Pension is also not changing.
That's not set in stone. The Company doesn't want to improve it. The Company would also prefer to have us work to FAR limits and be paid nothing, but they want pilots. Therefore, we negotiate.Originally Posted by kronan
Pension is also not changing.
The very definition of negotiate requires give and take by both parties.
Quote:
Pension also contains no COLA.
True. See above regarding negotiate.Originally Posted by kronan
Pension also contains no COLA.
Quote:
For a newhire (or a retiree) the value of our A plan is going to decrease.
If you assume the NEGOTIATED earnings cap (I repeat, not an IRS cap, but the Collective Bargaining Agreement cap) ... and again, if you ASSUME the NEGOTIATED earnings cap remains the same, the future value of the Defined Benefit Plan will decline with inflation.Originally Posted by kronan
For a newhire (or a retiree) the value of our A plan is going to decrease.
That is the VERY reason why ESPECIALLY the younger guys should be the strongest supporters of raising that NEGOTIATED cap, and establishing a COLA.
Quote:
I think a hybrid model that we currently have mitigates risk. Wouldn't a course of action with a higher Pk of success such as an increase of the B Fund with cash over cap be a better approach than using our negotiating energy to try and muscle out an increase in the A Plan, which they have made crystal clear they are not willing to budge on? Just thinking out loud here.
They are "crystal clear they are not willing to budge on"? Is that all it takes to halt negotiations?Originally Posted by Meat Fighter
I think a hybrid model that we currently have mitigates risk. Wouldn't a course of action with a higher Pk of success such as an increase of the B Fund with cash over cap be a better approach than using our negotiating energy to try and muscle out an increase in the A Plan, which they have made crystal clear they are not willing to budge on? Just thinking out loud here.
What if they're "crystal clear they are not willing to budge on" increasing hourly pay rates?
What if they're "crystal clear they are not willing to budge on" improving health insurance?
What if they're "crystal clear they are not willing to budge on" addressing aircraft environmental risks?
What other items can they take off the table by being "crystal clear they are not willing to budge"?
When will WE ever be crystal clear we're not going to accept "No"?
Quote:
Agree 100% We have a nice hybrid program now. Some increases in the B Plan is all we need!
That's just what The Company wanted us to do, just give up on raising the earnings cap on the Defined Benefit Plan. The plan was established and intended to provide 50% of the pilot's Final Average Earnings from retirement until death, and The Company's Labor Attorneys promised to raise the FAE cap to keep up with increasing hourly pay rates. They reneged, and we're supposed to cave?Originally Posted by max8222
Agree 100% We have a nice hybrid program now. Some increases in the B Plan is all we need!
Why don't we make it crystal clear we don't like liars and we are holding The Company responsible for previous promises and we will not accept anything less than 50% of Final Average Earnings as the starting point for the Defined Benefit?
It's simple, but it would require leadership and unity.
.