Bottom Line
- Thread starter Bob Owens
- Start date
TWU informer
Veteran
- Nov 4, 2003
- 7,550
- 3,731
TWA/IAM History of concessions is very similar to AA/TWU. TWU has negotiated concessions at AA for 20+ years. So what is your reason for accepting those?
Why don't we demand parity for Fleet Service Clerks on the next contract and stop having mechanics subsidize the overpaid unskilled?
Since you reply to my truthful posts, you obviously do.
Ouch !!
you got him on that one aafsc.I could say the same about TWU Informer ( Dave Stewart ) he says he does not care about
anything I say but he just can't help but reply to my post's
time after time.I guess he really does care, it just melts my heart to know that.
The silent treatment from him would really bother me and keep me up at night, I guess there is no fear of that though.
aafsc you do have some very good points about TWA, I don't comment on it because like the AMFA drive it is part of the past that cannot be changed so it is probably better off left in the past so we can concentrate on the present/future that will be more than enough of a challenge for everyone.
TWA was in a really bad spot just like AA and I have no doubt that those guys took concessions in an effort to survive as did AA employee's.
It is very easy to talk tough but acting tough is a whole lot harder.
TWU informer
Veteran
- Nov 4, 2003
- 7,550
- 3,731
For the record, most of Raptor's post on this bulletin board speak for themselves and need no comment.
The anti-union, selfish man is not misunderstood. He is correct about one thing, I do have a character flaw that makes it nearly impossible for me to be "nice" to such an individual.
The anti-union, selfish man is not misunderstood. He is correct about one thing, I do have a character flaw that makes it nearly impossible for me to be "nice" to such an individual.
See boys he just has to reply.
if they need no comment then why comment. I really know how to get under his skin, and you guys can't know how much I enjoy that.
but having said that I would much rather spend my time debating the issues than going back & forth
with him.
By the way Dave you have MANY character flaws that is why you were never elected to ANY union office
how many times did you try to run 2 or 3 ? :unsure: I almost quit the AMFA drive when I thought you might
be elected as an AMFA President but the guys in the CSD shop assured me that would never happen, they
pointed out that you could not get elected as a TWU officer so the same would happen under AMFA, they
did make perfect sense.
By the way stop posting stupid bible list's that you yourself have no intention of following, if you can't practic
what you preach then don't preach.
By the way nobody wants to visit your stupid bonehead website.
Now hit me with you next bonehead reply before I get bored with you.
TWU informer
Veteran
- Nov 4, 2003
- 7,550
- 3,731
No reply needed, as I said before they speak far more than I could add.
I win again.
P.S your avatar is really lame what is that a dunce sitting in a dark corner, is that suppose to represent you.
It does.
local 12 proud
Veteran
- Mar 5, 2004
- 4,265
- 4
I win again.
P.S your avatar is really lame what is that a dunce sitting in a dark corner, is that suppose to represent you.
It does.
Good grief, what is your age again?
TWU-GOTTA-GO
Advanced
- Nov 22, 2006
- 151
- 0
Same as his IQ...45 :bleh:
MCI transplant
Veteran
- Jun 4, 2003
- 5,311
- 584
- Banned
- #175
<_< -------"Truthful"? Man your delusional!---- You need help! What, are you still looking for that school bus full of exTWA people coming down I95 to take your job? I'm serious aa! Your rantings are classic Paranoia! I believe our AA insurance covers cases like yours!! You'll fined it under treatment for "Mental Health"!Since you reply to my truthful posts, you obviously do.
LGA Fleet Service
Veteran
They agreed to drop the LPP provisions of their contracts when TWA threatened to file an 1113 motion in bankruptcy court to void their contracts altogether.And for the record it was the IAM that requested binding arbitration, the TWU was essentially silent on how the actual integration would take place.
Hey gloating is a good thing, especially when someone else starts the PERSONAL fight and then quits.
If you don't have the stomach for it then don't get PERSONAL.
I don't believe I have started any PERSONAL fights, since I started back on the board about 4 weeks ago.
not sure about in the past 4 years ago, but I certainly will finish any that someone else starts.
If everyone keeps it Professional I certainly will as well.
The strike Poll results are interesting but not unexpected.
eolesen
Veteran
- Jul 23, 2003
- 15,959
- 9,374
Going back a couple of pages....
If you retire early, the PBGC does not necessarily guarantee the full amount of your pension.
Policy:
Exception:
The exception is rarely invoked. The only example I can think of where this might apply is a pilot plan; they may not get the full benefit, but a reasonably funded plan could provide benefits at a level higher than the PBGC max.
The other exception which might help is if PBGC manages to secure additional funds from a party who terminates their plan. When UAL terminated their pensions, they claimed the value of their frequent flyer program at less than $1B, yet they're now touting the spin-off value as being considerably higher. If they did sell it for more, employees have already started a drive to have some of those profits "recovered" by the PBGC. Could be interesting if it happens...
For plans ended in 2007,
An employee who retired at 65 would receive a max $4125 without a survivor option.
An employee who retired in 2007 at 55 would receive a max $1856 without a survivor option.
An employee who retired in 2003 at 55 would receive a max $2516 without a survivor option (assuming they're 59 at the date of plan termination)
So... don't believe what you hear. Believe what you read from the PBGC:
Fact Sheet:
http://www.pbgc.gov/media/key-resources-fo.../page13542.html
Max guarantee charts:
http://www.pbgc.gov/workers-retirees/find-...nt/page789.html
If you retire early, the PBGC does not necessarily guarantee the full amount of your pension.
Policy:
Exception:
The exception is rarely invoked. The only example I can think of where this might apply is a pilot plan; they may not get the full benefit, but a reasonably funded plan could provide benefits at a level higher than the PBGC max.
The other exception which might help is if PBGC manages to secure additional funds from a party who terminates their plan. When UAL terminated their pensions, they claimed the value of their frequent flyer program at less than $1B, yet they're now touting the spin-off value as being considerably higher. If they did sell it for more, employees have already started a drive to have some of those profits "recovered" by the PBGC. Could be interesting if it happens...
For plans ended in 2007,
An employee who retired at 65 would receive a max $4125 without a survivor option.
An employee who retired in 2007 at 55 would receive a max $1856 without a survivor option.
An employee who retired in 2003 at 55 would receive a max $2516 without a survivor option (assuming they're 59 at the date of plan termination)
So... don't believe what you hear. Believe what you read from the PBGC:
Fact Sheet:
http://www.pbgc.gov/media/key-resources-fo.../page13542.html
Max guarantee charts:
http://www.pbgc.gov/workers-retirees/find-...nt/page789.html
TWU informer
Veteran
- Nov 4, 2003
- 7,550
- 3,731
I didn't quit, I am still here. Go ahead and post more of your mind shattering opinions.
It is not the gloating that is getting attention, it is the selfish anti-union rhetoric that is raising eyebrows as best I can tell.
TWU-GOTTA-GO
Advanced
- Nov 22, 2006
- 151
- 0
All those facts just ruined rapture's dreams of bailing out. Now he will be forced to bootlick even more to ensure the pension will never go away.
