so answer do you want post 2018 non cadillac plan now, that will guarantee the company will not have to pay an excise tax RIGHT NOW...Tim Nelson said:A neutral arbitrator is a third party. Not sure why we have to discuss this. But, the problem is compounded in that it isn't just a third party but after the third party gets selected, the remaining process shitt cans the union and it becomes a 2 party situation. Sorta like a spouse getting to pick a divorce attorney for his wife but then he has to leave the building. Remember, after the selection of the arbitrator, the remaining part of that letter is a two party relationship. The only nouns are "Arbitrator" and "Company". The only rights are "Company". Below is the path, for your review and kindly show me where our union or us have any right in all of this.
Process:
1. Arbitrator determines any modification to ensure no taxes apply for company [not my words]
2. If Arbitrator can't guarantee modifications would offset the taxes for the affected plan then the company has the right [not my words] to terminate the plan.
3. If a plan is terminated then the arbitrator is empowered to designate [not my words] a new 80% plan.
4. If in the process, the arbitrator hasn't ruled yet, then the Company shall be permitted to implement and can make changes as it considers [not my words] necessary to avoid taxes.
5. Company shall have a reasonable time
As you see, the AGC"s are outright lying when they say that the union will be right there negotiating step by step. The union will have to leave the building like Elvis. It's in the letter and this will be NON NEGOTIABLE once the arbitrator is picked.
And if you get the 'warm fuzzies' over the initial 90 day 'drop dead' negotiation window, then you might want to see how good that 90 day negotiating window did for those stations that were contracted out at United and pay attention to Brother Delaney's newest update where he has yet another Barbie tantrum saying the company is just "Wrong" to contract out our members because "I think we do a better job than vendors". Sorry, but when the AGC's and Rich claimed greatness for negotiating sessions that are not longer than 'summer school', I told folks it was all bull shitt then, like I'm telling you now that the 90 day 'summer school session' negotiations isn't going to do squat in 2018. We will just have to bare the consequences that's all. No cap, No nothing. It's as simple as that.
What I find truly interesting is how folks desperately want the money grab and become single issued. I get it! I already know what I'm going to do with the extra cash as well. But let's not blow smoke up everyone's arse telling them that the union will have any power or authority with modifications or termination of plans once a third party is triggered. K? And don't get me started on my retirement.
To be sure, if I'm in JAX or any station subject to being contracted out, I vote for this, so I understand yes votes. If I'm dying with bills and need a short term fix to feed 4 mouths, I get that. But I'm in my 50's and health care, and pension are front and center with me. Just respect my no vote, that's all. I haven't busted any of you or the vast majority who will vote yes. Will I engage when I hear bull shitt? Your damn straight I will.
i mean we dont know how much if any.. that plan will go over the federal law mandated cap. it could go over by 500 or it could go over by 10000 if its 500 dollars very little change would be necessary... in fact could be worked with the insurance company to keep the plan high, to cut the rate... because a little cut in their profits is better than losing the farm so to speak.
so tell me timmy tell us all are you ready to let the company renegotiate all our plans today... to a substandard plan... today... and for the next four years... and to guarantee that there would be no excise tax they aren't going to cut the costs a little but a lot like 10000 or more to insure any changes to the law doesn't affect the negotiated plan
so today right now... right now... i know you need repetition we will dealing with your above "nightmare" or would you rather do it in 2018 where the change may be very tiny and the membership gets to keep their current benefits for at the very least 4 years
are you ready to tell the membership that that's worth it? but having a letter that would keep our current plans... for right now, and the next four years is not and way too much of a risk for right now, and the next four years... and thereafter..
id love to know how you would explain why getting rates that we wouldn't need for at 4 years and substandard medical for at least 4 years is worth it, but a letter putting that off for four years isn't, please timmy explain that to me and the rest of the membership here...
explain your