JCBA Negotiations and updates for AA Fleet

[Tim Nelson]

Some news today for P. Rez.

http://www.nbcnews.com/pop-culture/music/jury-finds-led-zeppelin-did-not-steal-intro-rock-epic-n597761

any more news on Lombardo's screaming fight in front of the IEC? Hopefully, cooler heads prevail and things can move forward.

 

[WeAAsles]

any more news on Lombardo's screaming fight in front of the IEC? Hopefully, cooler heads prevail and things can move forward.

It was a bad Burritto. Too much gas.

 

[P. REZ]

What if you used the same $1.15 company contriubution [4.5%] for the 401k?At any rate, we can do the math all day, the health of the IAMPF is conditioned on increasing the membership in it. Out of 200,000, less than 100,000 are actually participating. That's a big harness that is a weight around my pension that I don't want. The math also says that they will have to address future benefits within the next 5 years to further limit benefits.I remember we did the math on the $81, back in 2003, and that math is now cut in half by the stroke of a Trustee pen. And, the new pension law says that the trustee can come after my pension after I even retire. So many holes in the floor.

The scenario I posted in post 2464 was using the $1.15 for the 401k and the pension. The math favors the pension. The employee that used the $1.15 for the 401k would have $28,000 or so at age 65. I don't care what that employee does at that point, that wouldn't be enough for any type of comfortable retirement. However, the other employee would have $519.10 per month coming in. That is why the pension would be the better option in that scenario.

I want to reiterate that the pension is my preference (not a Pollyanna) but I believe that everyone should have a 401k regardless.

P. Rez

 

[WeAAsles]

The scenario I posted in post 2464 was using the $1.15 for the 401k and the pension. The math favors the pension. The employee that used the $1.15 for the 401k would have $28,000 or so at age 65. I don't care what that employee does at that point, that wouldn't be enough for any type of comfortable retirement. However, the other employee would have $519.10 per month coming in. That is why the pension would be the better option in that scenario.
I want to reiterate that the pension is my preference (not a Pollyanna) but I believe that everyone should have a 401k regardless.
P. Rez

You may not be a Pollyanna but I think you're conversing with a Pollywog.

 

[WeAAsles]

63 readers over here
6 readers on the other (hi guys) thread.

I DONT WANT the spinach even touching my plate.

Wah wah. That's why.

Yea I think I'll stay over here.

 

[Kev3188]

39 now...

 

[WeAAsles]

Oops just dropped down to 38?

Maybe a particular group of people is learning more on this thread then the dead one next door?

Stick around. We aim to please here.

 

[WeAAsles]

39 now...

It's like watching a pulse sometimes.

 

[WeAAsles]

39 now...

Good luck trying to bring that gal back to life. It's down to 4 now.

 

[Tim Nelson]

The scenario I posted in post 2464 was using the $1.15 for the 401k and the pension. The math favors the pension. The employee that used the $1.15 for the 401k would have $28,000 or so at age 65. I don't care what that employee does at that point, that wouldn't be enough for any type of comfortable retirement. However, the other employee would have $519.10 per month coming in. That is why the pension would be the better option in that scenario.

I want to reiterate that the pension is my preference (not a Pollyanna) but I believe that everyone should have a 401k regardless.

P. Rez

a big assumption with the IAMPF that the IAMPF trustees won't have to whack future benefits again, or current benefits under the new law. At least the 401k isn't a ponzie scheme. I trust that when you are negotiating that you consider your IAM members and the opportunity to have company contributions put into the 401k. Having the entire company contribution dumped into one leg of retirement, i.e., a defined pension, is nonsensical.

 

[Tim Nelson]

You may not be a Pollyanna but I think you're conversing with a Pollywog.

Of course he is a Pollyanna. Nothing against him but he gets 2 IAM pensions and $122,000 on top of that. Bought and owned. Sito preaches, and he turns the page. He has to. That's the story. The only difference is that you are an IAM Pollyanna due to default since you refuse to support your TWU Local leadership.

 

[Kev3188]

Good luck trying to bring that gal back to life. It's down to 4 now.

Not sure which one you're talking about, but viewer numbers fluctuate wildly- and that doesn't even count the ones that have web crawlers.

 

[WeAAsles]

Of course he is a Pollyanna. Nothing against him but he gets 2 IAM pensions and $122,000 on top of that. Bought and owned. Sito preaches, and he turns the page. He has to. That's the story. The only difference is that you are an IAM Pollyanna due to default since you refuse to support your TWU Local leadership.

Although I can't seem to figure out why it concerns you Dimmy. Above all you should understand the difference between elected representatives and Leaders right, since you claim that you too have no Leaders?

My elected representative, the Big Kahona. Is the only representative in Fleet who doesn't support the real "Leaders" of my Union.

Sorry bro but I just don't like to go Bahhh Bahhh.

I prefer Black Sheep Pappy Boyington personally. Now that guy was a true Leader.

 

[WeAAsles]

Not sure which one you're talking about, but viewer numbers fluctuate wildly- and that doesn't even count the ones that have web crawlers.

Thanks Tim.

I'm sure it is, lol.

 

[bob@las-AA]

Deleted