2015 AMT Discussion

We'll never be able to grasp his reason{s} for defending the IAMNPF even though he is not a part of it and apparently has nothing to gain (or lose).  
 
The whole association was to keep the IAM and the IAMPF going. Haven't you guys figured it out by now? Funny when you think there will be a choice. Maybe if the DOL lawsuit exposes some serious issues the mindset might change about being forced into it. But for now I don't see any choice.
 
Worldport said:
I would think the company has an X amount of dollars they will contribute to ones pension fund, they probably don't care where it goes. It is the IAM  faction of the Association that is pushing for the IAMNPF, and that faction is the group that needs to be addressed and I'm sure they are being pressured into pushing the plan. Any reasonable person would opt for a choice
this is normally the case. I don't imagine American will care if it goes to a 401K or IAMPF. As long as the cost the company the same and isn't a head ache for them. 
 
They simply do not want it on their books anymore. Give you (or an independent plan ala IAMPF) the money and be done with it.
 
Here is the problem in a nutshell, we are told the LAA plan will not be touched.
Like most AMT's I know they have at least as many years vested in the plan as I
which is 25 years.
If the IAM guys recieve the same $ value in their plan as the TWU guys get in
their 401K match plan, won't they be pissed once they figure out the over all $
value of the contract includes the costs of maintaining and payouts of the Current
AA retiree's and the vested employees . Or will the LAA employees recieve less
$ value in the 401k match?
So how do you make it equal? Or do you just keep that fact hidden .........oops!
 
700 has already been proven wrong by myself and others out here time and time again. WHY would anyone ask 700 and listen to 700's answers and believe him? Pathetic to even ask him of his opinion...
 
swamt said:
700 has already been proven wrong by myself and others out here time and time again. WHY would anyone ask 700 and listen to 700's answers and believe him? Pathetic to even ask him of his opinion...
More misinformation.
 
Told you that NMB wasnt going to have a vote, after I found out, followed by Weaasles.
 
Gee, what happened to your high level contacts that said the NMB would have nothing to do with the Association, gee, who certified the Association?
That would be the NMB, shall I go back and post all your posts about how you stated the NMB told you they wouldnt be involved?
 
Once again, you post misinformation and get called out.
 
swamt said:
700 has already been proven wrong by myself and others out here time and time again. WHY would anyone ask 700 and listen to 700's answers and believe him? Pathetic to even ask him of his opinion...
Another one who cant refute the facts nor debate, so attack the poster, typical M.O.
 
How many years are you in Section 6 now over at WN?
 
Speaking of facts. What are the facts surrounding the DOL lawsuit against the crooks using the pension funds from the IAMNPF for their own personal use?
 
Sounds like organized crime, huh!
 
The cost to the company for the IAMPF is a fixed cost amount. An annual hourly limit of 2080 hours, times the dollar amount input, times the number of eligible employees. The 401k is a variable cost based on how many participate and at what percentage, no limit on hours so over time sweetens ones pot. Financial industry statistics report many eligible employees do not participate in a 401k or do not put in enough to max out a company match. Bean counters got the numbers.
 
skinvalve said:
The cost to the company for the IAMPF is a fixed cost amount. An annual hourly limit of 2080 hours, times the dollar amount input, times the number of eligible employees. The 401k is a variable cost based on how many participate and at what percentage, no limit on hours so over time sweetens ones pot. Financial industry statistics report many eligible employees do not participate in a 401k or do not put in enough to max out a company match. Bean counters got the numbers.

Exactly. I still run into people who aren't putting in the full 5.5% and realizing their maximum value. Most of those people are newer hires so the amount lost to them from the company is not as much as it is from a topped out employee. But I have met some of them as well.

The TWU portion of the Pension is also underfunded. Because of that even if all parties wanted to I don't believe the IAMPF can have our portions transferred to their accounts for the simple reason that they would have to make cut's to the payouts to stay in the green zone. I'm pretty sure that there are agencies that would have a field day with that one? So I don't think that Boogey Man is under any of our beds. 

And again I do not support being given the IAMPF and losing the "choice" of a 401k match. Some airlines are even beginning to raise the match percentage. And obviously AA can afford to do the same.

And BTW.

  ATLANTA, Feb. 17, 2016 /PRNewswire/ -- Delta Air Lines (DAL) today announced that it has contributed $350 million in shares of its common stock to its pension plans.  This is in addition to the $825 million in cash contributions the company has already made to the plans this year.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/delta-announces-350-million-stock-120000618.html

 
 
And here's an interesting question for anyone who understands these things better than me.

Whatever AA has contributed to their pension Funds can they borrow it back at any time in the future if they get into financial trouble?
 

Latest posts

Back
Top