Challenge

[Boomer]

Excellent post, Boomer. A few weeks ago, eolesen posted a story outlining how IBM and others were analyzing whether they should cancel their health plans and pay the penalty, which was only about 20% or 25% of the annual health plan costs, IIRC.

Unless Obamacare is drastically amended (or Congress outlaws the practice), I can see AMR (and many other companies) deciding that the time is right to terminate their employee health plans and let the employees go to the exchanges with (at least) some of the cost savings.

Problem is, employer-paid health insurance is a nontaxable fringe for the most part but increased compensation (from some or all of the savings frrom canceling the health plan) is taxable income to the employees. That alone would eat up a bunch of the savings.

The problem is not taxable versus non-taxable income: hell, AMR/AA could future cost capture the relative discriminatory impact between the (under 50) and (50 and over) by increasing the automatic match on the 401(k) to the (49 and under) at X% for X years and leave the (50 and over) crowd contentedly chewing their cud on the sidelines.

The problem is that an Individual contributed an amount matched by AA into an individually numbered account, in a trust fund, held for that beneficiary under the appropriate contractual terms between the union and the company. Under the current M&R TA, despite the benficiary having fulfilled all legal terms to become qualified for participation: they are being removed, and their contribution match re-distributed soley on the basis of an illegal parameter for the benefit of a class of participants which may or may not have become qualified for participation in the first place.

 

[Bagbelt]

Do you still think that the OBAMACARE, sponsored by the TWU and the AFL-CIO, will only impact small businesses and the self-employed?

OBTW, how has the state budget for MASS OBAMACARE fared since enactment by Mitt Romney?

I think they should have let Romneys original plan of being bonded stand instead of compulsory purchase. I don't like the new law, but since corporate lobbiests and money are our defacto government I don't have an answer.

 

[Bagbelt]

If every other western nation can figure it out perhaps we will sooner or later...

 

[Ken MacTiernan]

"As far as saving the profession goes...that's what museums are for. Check out the blacksmith display at Colonial Williamsburg. I am sure the Smithsonian will have no trouble building a display honoring A&Ps."

Bad example ReadyNow. Museums display important/relevant aircraft (Since we are AMTs I assume this is the type of museum you are referring to.), due to their technological achievements. Not because AMTs are less important. Blacksmithing was overcome by technological advancements that lessened the need for blacksmiths. Aircraft maintenance needs AMTs to stay lockstep with each technological advancement; which we have done since December 1903.

"While I do value your efforts over the years in promoting the profession, I can't say that this contract is the profession killer, that was years ago. The profession took its first major blows back in the 80"s with b-scale and paying for medical, and the concession of prefunding. The profession was dealt a major setback with SRP's, and more weakening of language."

Tex-Mex

My point in that this t/a being a profession killer as compared to the good examples you make is that with the first black eyes our profession took with B Scale, SRPs and medical I feel can be fought through negotiating. (Please, I do not need to digress into this subject and have this thread veer off.) As battered as our profession is we are still standing however this t/a is the "blind sided round house kick to the temple" and we collectively need to fend of this blow by voting NO soundly. If this t/a connects we are down for the count because there will be no standing 10 count, it will be lights out, "Good night Nurse!".

"Now we are all going to pretend that sending James C. Little and his band of TWU appointed sellouts back to the bargaining table is going to save the profession.

There are alot of reasons to be opposed to this T/A, but to pretend that sending TWU back to negotiations after their 25+ year history of quid-pro-quo agreements is going to "save the profession" is lacking in sane judgement."

TWU Informer

I never said anything about pretending that Little and his band would "save the profession". I never even implied it. What I did say was that this t/a needs to be rejected overwhelmingly because if it does pass it will not matter who's name our dues are paid to. The TWU does not stand to lose much if this passes. If it passes the near future will see Eagle grow and AA shrink. Eagle AMTs are represented by the TWU. So, the TWU loses a little in one hand but gains a little in the other hand.

This t/a is poison. Pure and simple. For people to try and peddle this t/a and point to the PATHETIC financial improvements is cowardice at best. To peddle this t/a and NOT inform people of the ramifications the concessionary language holds for us is self serving as well as anti-union.

 

[Bob Owens]

Excellent post, Boomer. A few weeks ago, eolesen posted a story outlining how IBM and others were analyzing whether they should cancel their health plans and pay the penalty, which was only about 20% or 25% of the annual health plan costs, IIRC.

Unless Obamacare is drastically amended (or Congress outlaws the practice), I can see AMR (and many other companies) deciding that the time is right to terminate their employee health plans and let the employees go to the exchanges with (at least) some of the cost savings.

Problem is, employer-paid health insurance is a nontaxable fringe for the most part but increased compensation (from some or all of the savings frrom canceling the health plan) is taxable income to the employees. That alone would eat up a bunch of the savings.

What's stopping IBM or others from cancelling their Health Benifits plans now? Wouldnt they save even more money, while there's no penalty?The fact is that once a company no longer offers such benifits it makes it harder to recruit and retain workers. My guess is the majority of Part Timers(and even many full timers who have side businesses) stay at AA because of the benifits, Take that away and what does AA have to offer? Flight benifits? Yea, try and use them!

 

[Boomer]

What's stopping IBM or others from cancelling their Health Benifits plans now? Wouldnt they save even more money, while there's no penalty?The fact is that once a company no longer offers such benifits it makes it harder to recruit and retain workers. My guess is the majority of Part Timers(and even many full timers who have side businesses) stay at AA because of the benifits, Take that away and what does AA have to offer? Flight benifits? Yea, try and use them!

,

Bob Owens,

The reason, IMHO, for the choice of 50 for continued participation in the TWU Contractual Retiree Medical Insurance, is that under the TWU/AA plAAn; a TWU member is eligible for early retirement at age 55.

I say this because the TWU/AFL-CIO sponsored OBAMACARE "grandfathers" self-insureds like AA for five years from passage of the act.

It also "grandfathers" other unions that are self-insured under their respective VEBA Trusts like the UAW, the IAM and the IBEW.

It seems somewhat hypocritical of Obama to threaten Companies that are self-insured while also not naming the aforementioned Unions. Perhaps this is why the TWU and AA agreed to form another group outside the language of the current TWU M&R TA that will "discuss" the creation of a TWU controlled VEBA Trust for retiree medical insurance.

After all, we've all seen how willing the TWU is to become an insurance salesman while failing to live up to the terms and conditions of the policies sold.