American Airlines and Labor Negotiations

[Tim Nelson]

Tim,

First, I am not selling the pension, I'm showing math, and math you can't say is fake news because math is math. I wish you would crunch some numbers yourself but here you go. Take a PT employee not topped out making say $25/hr. and let's say he works 1750 hours in a year. That would give them $43750 for the year. To make it simple, they make $43750 each year for the next 10 years and then retire. With the 9% 401k offer, with putting in 4% of their own money, they would invest $5688 per year for 10 years and with a 7% return have $84089. At retirement, they would take out 4% per year which would equal $280 per month. If they kept the pension instead, they would have $499 per month(49.94x10 years). That's potentially $219 lost for moving to a 401k match.

P. Rez

Prez,
in a perfect world, who wouldnt want a pension?
The problem is that in about 12 months they will have to cut my pension again. Then in about 5 years it will be fully gone and Id get $0 unless congress steps in and gives pbgc the proper support to maintain the minimum guarantee of $35 multiplier.
Btw, i dont think any pt gets 34 hr a week pension credit since the company only pays regular schedule hours. That said, it is true that workers not topped out receive up to 10%. The big problem is that your math says the titanic has enuf fuel to get to NY but you arent recognizing the iceburg that will sink it soon enuf.

 

[WeAAsles]

“Too many Americans underestimate the value of their employer-sponsored retirement savings accounts, particularly if the employer is willing to match some, or all, employee contributions. While the majority of workers with 401(k) plans contribute more than enough to take full advantage of their employer's matching program, there are still about 20% of people who don't.”

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/110251212

And on top of this my guess would be that the numbers at AA would be even higher than 20% because the Company already “Contributes” 3% and if its moved up to 5% there will be many Members who feel that’s quite good enough already.

So we have at the bear minimum a known number of 20% of Association Members who will be losing 4% of direct compensation that Management wants to pilfer back into their own coffers offering us no value for.

 

[Kev3188]

Ok this is the second time you have made this comment. Personally I don’t think it should be a given when I’m sure there are more than enough studies out there that are accessible to inform the Company what would be their anticipated savings by “forcing” their employees to self fund to receive the match portion.

If the "ask" for a match is X%, then you have to plan on budgeting the full amount.

Lemme try this; its a coarse analogy, but hopefully it makes sense.

I coach my son's soccer team. Home team pays the refs. The ref gets $36, and each linesman gets $24 (there are supposed to be two at every match). That's $84 total per game, or $336 total for all 4 home games.

Sometimes one or both linemen don't show up. In that case, the $$$ goes back to the club. But the assumption is everyone will show up to every game, and therefore, the FULL amount is what is budgeted for/distributed to the teams to pay on game day. To not do so would be irresponsible.

 

[MetalMover]

Do you realize that the company has yet to even propose a full offer?
You want to vote????
Vote on what????
Everyone that is asking for a vote is asking to vote on something that HASNT EVEN BEEN WRITTEN!! The ENTIRE OFFER from the company would be approx 150-200 long and some people want to vote because they are so easily SWAYED by a FEW PARAGRAPHS!
My goodness....

WAKE UP!!!!!

Don't assume I or anyone else wants to vote on any sub standard contract.
I want to see what is on the table. THAT'S ALL!
DID I SAY I WANTED TO VOTE???

I JUST WANT TO SEEE WHAT GP IS CRYING ABOUT!

 

[WeAAsles]

http://www.finra.org/investors/highlights/take-maximum-401k-match

“Employees tend to save more for retirement as they age and earn more money. For example, 42% of plan participants earning less than $40,000 per year don’t take full advantage of their employer match. That compares to just 10% of employees who earn more than $100,000 annually. Likewise, employees under age 30 are approximately twice as likely to miss out on their employer match compared to employees over the age of 60 (30% vs. 16%).”

https://financialengines.com/education-center/employer_match_results/

You see this information is not difficult to obtain.

“42% of plan participants earning less than $40,000 per year don’t take full advantage of their employer match”

Anyone here think the Company doesn’t know this quiet well?

 

[WeAAsles]

If the "ask" for a match is X%, then you have to plan on budgeting the full amount.

Lemme try this; its a coarse analogy, but hopefully it makes sense.

I coach my son's soccer team. Home team pays the refs. The ref gets $36, and each linesman gets $24 (there are supposed to be two at every match). That's $84 total per game, or $336 total for all 4 home games.

Sometimes one or both linemen don't show up. In that case, the $$$ goes back to the club. But the assumption is everyone will show up to every game, and therefore, the FULL amount is what is budgeted for/distributed to the teams to pay on game day. To not do so would be irresponsible.

American Airlines is not a Sports club. It’s a Corporation. And if you feel satisfied with the Corporation you work for obtaining value back from either you or your group more power to you.

And if my Company wants to make the assumption that all of us are going to maximize that offered 401k value, they may as well make it a full Contribution and they’ll be no arguments.

But from the items I posted above we all know what the truth is.

 

[AANOTOK]

Don't assume I or anyone else wants to vote on any sub standard contract.
I want to see what is on the table. THAT'S ALL!
DID I SAY I WANTED TO VOTE???

I JUST WANT TO SEEE WHAT GP IS CRYING ABOUT!

That's assumed quite a bit around here, among other things, Metal. I'm broke, need money desperately, have done a horrible job with my financial life according to some who think they know all.

By the way, negotiations are about take and give, and LEVERAGE. Anyone have any idea what leverage the Association may be in possession of?

 

[PIEDMONT784]

Tim,

First, I am not selling the pension, I'm showing math, and math you can't say is fake news because math is math. I wish you would crunch some numbers yourself but here you go. Take a PT employee not topped out making say $25/hr. and let's say he works 1750 hours in a year. That would give them $43750 for the year. To make it simple, they make $43750 each year for the next 10 years and then retire. With the 9% 401k offer, with putting in 4% of their own money, they would invest $5688 per year for 10 years and with a 7% return have $84089. At retirement, they would take out 4% per year which would equal $280 per month. If they kept the pension instead, they would have $499 per month(49.94x10 years). That's potentially $219 lost for moving to a 401k match.

P. Rez

Rez-- he is not going to EVER admit pensions are superior to 401k's... it would be against his 'special interest'...
Thankfully, the NC, along with the Membership knows better. The collective IQ of the represented group prevails every single time!

>SPIT<

 

[PIEDMONT784]

“To
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/110251212

And on top of this my guess would be that the numbers at AA would be even higher than 20% because the Company already “Contributes” 3% and if its moved up to 5% there will be many Members who feel that’s quite good enough already.

So we have at the bear minimum a known number of 20% of Association Members who will be losing 4% of direct compensation that Management wants to pilfer back into their own coffers offering us no value for.

Weez... you pay full value at the table for the match... the company knows it will NEVER have to honor what you just baragined for! Thats why Companies lobbied congress for 401k's to begin with!

 

[WeAAsles]

Weez... you pay full value at the table for the match... the company knows it will NEVER have to honor what you just baragined for! Thats why Companies lobbied congress for 401k's to begin with!

Corporations chose to bail out of Defined Benefit Pensions to shift their liabilities and responsibilities back on to their employees and out of the hands of their shareholders. And Laws gave them the ability to make horrible investments, underfund their obligations and then ultimately to dismiss their responsibilities through the Bankruptcy Court process.

I think there’s tremendous value to having both retirement vehicles in ones portfolio but I have to be careful what I say here because there are some posters who want to make a contest out of having multiple retirement vehicles or stool legs on here.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Rez-- he is not going to EVER admit pensions are superior to 401k's... it would be against his 'special interest'...
Thankfully, the NC, along with the Membership knows better. The collective IQ of the represented group prevails every single time!

>SPIT<

the only number that matters is $0 because the pension is now underfunded by $1 billion after pissing thru our $1.5 billion benefit cut. And it will have to get another $1.5 billion and take whatever is left from my benefits. Then file with the us treasury like these asses did with another iam pension 6 months ago to suspend all benefits so that plan can be green. Those poor iam members only got the bare minimum guarantee $35 multiplier +10% of $39 a month.

 

[T5towbar]

If you read the UAL contract, there is now no limit on PT. ORD went from around 50 part timers to hundreds and the number continues to spike. It's going to be like UPS and a cash cow for the IAM since 2 part timers - double the dues from one full timer. Teamsters boosted their membership after that UPS deal in the 90s where 85% of Teamsters are part time. Tons more members. Teamsters are a part time union now. Same with SEIU.

ORD is not a great comparison because it had the least amount of PT throughout the whole combined UA/CO system. Some say to the detriment of other stations. But you are correct that it is affecting the Line stations and some of the hubs. Without a percentage cap, you look in the System Bid List and if you want to move, everything is PT for the most desirable places, unless you want to come to a place like SFO or my hub to get FT. I don't know the whole breakdown after contract, but it is a problem. I don't want this job to become like UPS, but it slowly seems like it's coming to that. I will be forced to finish my career in my hub, instead of elsewhere. And a long as the dues are flowing, the IAM doesn't seem to care. In my hub, our PT people will be going to 6 hr shifts now, and that is causing problems with people having other jobs.

Bottom line is that this is something to fight to keep, and protect your scope as well.

BTW. when you guys mean Catering, do you have a full kitchen (make & prep the meals) and alcohol unit? Or you just do the Provisioning (bringing the items from the kitchens and stocking the aircraft) Just curious, because we had/have people coming over to the ramp from or kitchen (Chelsea). They came over because it paid a whole lot less than coming to the ramp.

 

[Kev3188]

That's assumed quite a bit around here, among other things, Metal. I'm broke, need money desperately, have done a horrible job with my financial life according to some who think they know all.

By the way, negotiations are about take and give, and LEVERAGE. Anyone have any idea what leverage the Association may be in possession of?

Good question, but the more they double down on keeping a multi-employer pension plan, the more they give away.

 

[Tim Nelson]

ORD is not a great comparison because it had the least amount of PT throughout the whole combined UA/CO system. Some say to the detriment of other stations. But you are correct that it is affecting the Line stations and some of the hubs. Without a percentage cap, you look in the System Bid List and if you want to move, everything is PT for the most desirable places, unless you want to come to a place like SFO or my hub to get FT. I don't know the whole breakdown after contract, but it is a problem. I don't want this job to become like UPS, but it slowly seems like it's coming to that. I will be forced to finish my career in my hub, instead of elsewhere. And a long as the dues are flowing, the IAM doesn't seem to care. In my hub, our PT people will be going to 6 hr shifts now, and that is causing problems with people having other jobs.

Bottom line is that this is something to fight to keep, and protect your scope as well.

BTW. when you guys mean Catering, do you have a full kitchen (make & prep the meals) and alcohol unit? Or you just do the Provisioning (bringing the items from the kitchens and stocking the aircraft) Just curious, because we had/have people coming over to the ramp from or kitchen (Chelsea). They came over because it paid a whole lot less than coming to the ramp.

not full kitchen. we operate the trucks from the kitchen to the jet. pack the liquer as well.

 

[Racer X]

Don't assume I or anyone else wants to vote on any sub standard contract.
I want to see what is on the table. THAT'S ALL!
DID I SAY I WANTED TO VOTE???

I JUST WANT TO SEEE WHAT GP IS CRYING ABOUT!

You’re an angry elf aren’t you?