JCBA Negotiations and updates for AA Fleet

[WeAAsles]

Pension info
FT $1.15 = $51.91
PT $0.75= $37.93

http://youtu.be/HqgE__H3JAM

 

[Kev3188]

That's the best thing you've posted all day!

 

[AANOTOK]

Pension info

FT $1.15 = $51.91
PT $0.75= $37.93

Are midweek teasers updates thoughts prohibited?

 

[P. REZ]

Very simplified example of pension versus 401k with match:

Assumptions I made:

Employee's both FT, 1 taking pension, 1 taking 401k with 5.5% match, both work 1601 hours each year, both work 10 more years, market returns 7%.

Pension employee would under LUS current have after 10 years $519.10 per month at retirement. Now let's multiply that for 20 years = $124,584.

401k employee would have accumulated $26,981 at retirement. No matter how you try to take this money and make it last 20 years, it doesn't compare to the pension scenario.

Now, I know there isn't a crystal ball to tell me if the pension will take hits or not, I personally believe that the pension is the best option not having the crystal ball. Before anyone attacks, this is by no means the opinion of anybody but me and I am a big fan of 401k's and personally save with one.

P. Rez

 

[Talos]

I have a option of my own. I was able to go to the IAMPF site and plugged in the hypothetical numbers and came away extremely disappointed. What I'm advocating for is it not to be offered period! The this talk from everyone leads me to the conclusion that it's a disaster and should be avoided like the plague. To be a member, you have to pay your union dues to the IAM. Simple math here folks. IAM dues are $80+ dollars a month, to get a $600 monthly check. And that's $80+ for the same representation. BTY that's $600 for 35 years of service. Everyone should be shouting for a bigger paycheck and let the individual best choose the path to retirement.

Multi employer plans are just not good. I read some stuff from financial people and the remarks were negative. A lot of people at LAA are quite senior and would have no hope of building anything with the IAMPF. I thought it was a good thing that the LUS people got to save their pensions with the IAMPF but hopefully it is a choice for the LAA people. The numbers you mentioned Bob were alarming. $600 after 35 years? 

 

[Jester]

Pension info

FT $1.15 = $51.91
PT $0.75= $37.93

 
I have been thinking about this for awhile... in a sense, isn't this a reduction in our compensation of our JCBA between US and AW? If I voted based upon the whole package, which included some expectation of a future pension benefit, then to have it cut, of course, that's an unexpected reduction in our compensation as we voted upon.
 
Now if the Company did this (as in reducing our hourly pay even alittle bit), we would be outraged and greviances would be flying.  However, let the union pension do it and we just say, "Oh well, let's hope it doesn't happen again," especialy as new laws allow current retirees to have their pensions cut, as well?
 
I just don't know if I can trust the IAMPF not do future cuts as the expected pay-outs are less than the current value of the pensions assets.

 

[robbedagain]

Thanks p rez. I like the 3 stage scenario. 401K, pension n s.s.

 

[WeAAsles]

Very simplified example of pension versus 401k with match:
Assumptions I made:
Employee's both FT, 1 taking pension, 1 taking 401k with 5.5% match, both work 1601 hours each year, both work 10 more years, market returns 7%.
Pension employee would under LUS current have after 10 years $519.10 per month at retirement. Now let's multiply that for 20 years = $124,584.
401k employee would have accumulated $26,981 at retirement. No matter how you try to take this money and make it last 20 years, it doesn't compare to the pension scenario.
Now, I know there isn't a crystal ball to tell me if the pension will take hits or not, I personally believe that the pension is the best option not having the crystal ball. Before anyone attacks, this is by no means the opinion of anybody but me and I am a big fan of 401k's and personally save with one.
P. Rez

Same thing I've been trying to explain to some of these people. I currently put 20% into my 401k and the company matches 5.5% of that contribution.

My favorite option out there currently would be the new UAL deal. Yes it denotes my match down to 3% rather than 5.5%. So if I want to continue 5.5% I take 2.5% from our upcoming raises and add that in. In that scenario I've lost nothing and gained whatever money I'll get from the IAMPF.

Another scenario floated is a force in to the IAMPF completely losing the match. Again worst case scenario now I have to contribute 5.5% more from my raises to maintain status quo (And I by far do not believe we will be forced BTW)

Added benefit if LAA is included into the fund is the fact of providing that fund more contributing participants during a time of company expansion. Younger new participants absolutely providing more solvency to the plan for those currently in it (And me as well if I join)

The IAMPF is NOT one of the plans on the PBGC danger list even if people are alluding themselves that it is.

I'm hoping again that we are given the "choice" to participate.

 

[WeAAsles]

Multi employer plans are just not good. I read some stuff from financial people and the remarks were negative. A lot of people at LAA are quite senior and would have no hope of building anything with the IAMPF. I thought it was a good thing that the LUS people got to save their pensions with the IAMPF but hopefully it is a choice for the LAA people. The numbers you mentioned Bob were alarming. $600 after 35 years?

His math is wacky. Look at the IAMPF payout schedule yourself when you know what (if) AA is willing to contribute into it for you?

 

[Jester]

I have a option of my own. I was able to go to the IAMPF site and plugged in the hypothetical numbers and came away extremely disappointed. What I'm advocating for is it not to be offered period! The this talk from everyone leads me to the conclusion that it's a disaster and should be avoided like the plague. To be a member, you have to pay your union dues to the IAM. Simple math here folks. IAM dues are $80+ dollars a month, to get a $600 monthly check. And that's $80+ for the same representation. BTY that's $600 for 35 years of service. Everyone should be shouting for a bigger paycheck and let the individual best choose the path to retirement.

 
Not so simple... let's not have any illusions if not for unions, we would be making anything close to $24/hour to sling bags, and Delta does it only to keep the unions from taking a foothold.  I figure Swissport guys are making around $12/hours, and the difference would be $480 per week full-time?  Over a month $2,000 extra and it cost you $80/month?  Sounds like a bargain to me.

 

[WeAAsles]

I have been thinking about this for awhile... in a sense, isn't this a reduction in our compensation of our JCBA between US and AW? If I voted based upon the whole package, which included some expectation of a future pension benefit, then to have it cut, of course, that's an unexpected reduction in our compensation as we voted upon.
 
Now if the Company did this (as in reducing our hourly pay even alittle bit), we would be outraged and greviances would be flying.  However, let the union pension do it and we just say, "Oh well, let's hope it doesn't happen again," especialy as new laws allow current retirees to have their pensions cut, as well?
 
I just don't know if I can trust the IAMPF not do future cuts as the expected pay-outs are less than the current value of the pensions assets.

None of us can trust that in the future it doesn't become necessary that it "HAS" to cut benefits?

We also can't trust that another Global Financial collapse doesn't happen in the future and decimate our 401k's either.

It has happened in the past already.

 

[WeAAsles]

Not so simple... let's not have any illusions if not for unions, we would be making anything close to $24/hour to sling bags, and Delta does it only to keep the unions from taking a foothold.  I figure Swissport guys are making around $12/hours, and the difference would be $480 per week full-time?  Over a month $2,000 extra and it cost you $80/month?  Sounds like a bargain to me.

Oh Thank You so much Sir.

 

[Kev3188]

His math is wacky. Look at the IAMPF payout schedule yourself when you know what (if) AA is willing to contribute into it for you?

By then it's too late (other than to vote yes/no), as it would already be part of a T/A.

 

[WeAAsles]

By then it's too late (other than to vote yes/no), as it would already be part of a T/A.

Let me make this clear again to you.

My choices.

To be given ALL the money and chose how I want to invest it.
To be given the opportunity to join the IAMPF AND keep my current company match
To get the same deal as UAL got IAMPF and 3% match
To have a choice between a 401k match or participation in the IAMPF

IN THAT ORDER.

The choice I do NOT want.

NO CHOICE.

Your option as I see it. Again the option of a non AA employee/ non Association member.

 

[AANOTOK]

Are midweek teasers updates thoughts prohibited?

A simple yes or no doesn't take up too much bandwidth, but no answer at all definitely takes up less.  B)