I think I’m starting to understand. But I have some questions since I’m a little slow sometimes. Does it cost the company less per year to fund a pilot’s pension for each year he is on property, over than 25 years? In other words, does it cost the company less to hire a 30 year old versus a 40 year old pilot, in terms of funding their pension? Is it fair to the younger pilots in general. Maybe it would be more fair to eliminate the max YOS and lowering the multiplier instead of increasing the cap?

These ideas are just me thinking out loud on here without figuring out every ramification, like training costs, etc. I was looking at it from the perspective of trying not to incentivize going beyond the lawful age though. Maybe that isn’t as important as I was perceiving it to be? Increasing max YOS or increasing the multiplier past 25 years will incentivize staying longer and it would seemingly increase company costs.

Irony.... Weren't you are part of the MEC which ignored the membership in regards to age 65 changes? I would contend that nothing has really changed since then.. I remember a quote, but not from who, to the effect "Our MEC leadership knows better than its members." I seem to remember, also, 2 block reps recalled for such..

I'm not throwing stones but this whole thing stinks and have we not learned from past events? The names may have changed but the leadership being smarter than the membership mentality has not.

Nope.

Your memory is failing you, on several counts. (It's the price we pay for getting older. )


The famous poll was commissioned by the ALPA National President's Blue Ribbon Committee to study the effects of regulated age change. Our own Scott Stratton was the committee's R&I expert. Our MEC had nothing to do with the poll, and I wasn't on the MEC at that time.


Any member of the MEC, whether member or officer, who claims to make decisions contrary to the will of the membership because he/she claims to be smarter than the membership deserves to be recalled, but that was never the issue in the last three recalls.

However, we expect those same people to be better informed than the general membership for a number of reasons. For one, it's their JOB to be informed. For another thing, they often have access to more sources of information, sometimes sources only available to them because they have signed non-disclosure agreements.

So, better informed, maybe, but not necessarily smarter.

From the perspective of a member, it's sometimes hard to distinguish the difference.

But I agree with you about the smell of things.






.

Thanks for the clarification.

Assuming YOS and max cap for both of your hypothetical pilots, the only difference for funding a pension is essentially the age at which they retire. The 40 year old has to retire at 65 to max his out but the 30 year old can retire at 60. Buying an annuity for a 60 year old is about 10 to 20% more expensive than buying one for a 65 year old. It must not be important to tell us how much it cost the company to fund our pension, it remains a secret. The cost of funding an annuity that pays $130K is between 1.9 (65 years old) and 2.2 million (60 years old). Obviously the company makes money (at least on the pension) if guys stay past 25. But if he goes out at 60 it is probably a wash as his pension will payout more.

Make that annuity expensive... retire now if you are over 52

Its right on VIPS, below sick button....easy

Sick/Leave Requests
Call in Sick or Well
Military Service Notification
Advance Retirement Notice

Fedex does NOT buy the pilots an annuity. It's amazing how many pilots still believe this...

OK, then what do they do?

I have heard the annuity story several times.

How does it actually work?

Didn’t say they do, but until the union shares the data it is the only way to estimate the value of the retirement.

Every peak is record setting season, every year is record profits. Stocks are up future looks bright, except for the retirement plan which the union seems eager to flush away. It’s time FDX ALPA stand strong against management on something. The the retirement is not worth fight for then what is?