Cwa Buyout Proposal

[wench]

WCG-Be thankful indeed YOU ARE NOT..
I am and have been since Jun03..
A friend who transferred to PHL last yr gave me an article on the Demise OF USAIRWAYS>

It's very long and at the moment I have not the time to post.
I will and boy oh boy this will raise brows...

THIS IS NOT DIRECTED TO THE employees--BUT TO MGMT>>

I'll give a example:"USAirways treats everyone-governments, employees and pssengers-like dirt. But to blame the passengers for what was it's own mistakes is the worst'>

It developed froma sunday problem at pit arpt..

I cannot wait to post..This will be on a separate post..and I'm sure CCY will take note of it..

TTFN

 

[WestCoastGuy]

I would take the Cwa buyout proposal as it is written, but I honestly can not see the company agreeing to such a thing. The will of course, reply that the company cannot afford the couple of million it would cost them in the short run. But I dont think it would cost any more than the last group of executives that bailed out took with them. Let's see, Seigel, Wolf, Gangwal, Scholfield, not to mention the group of cronnies that left with them. How many millions was that???? Not to mention the free cars, income taxes paid by the company, living allowances, pensions. A million here, a million there...soon we're talking some REAL money out the door.

 

[Fatherknowsbest]

Members of local 3641 (CLT) are petetioning the CWA to modify or withdraw its buyout proposal to the Company because it was done WITHOUT membership authorization, is a lowball offer, and only protects employees 50 or older with medical benefits, and does not take into account how many years of service employees have.

I URGE other CWA members to also petetion the Union.

For CWA members to take a looksee, go to

WWW.cwalocal3641.com and check out the water cooler.

Thank you!

 

[tadjr]

And once again I cant understand WHY NO ONE there expressed their views to anyone at the local. They have a WHOLE PAGE of local contact info set up for the members to contact them from emails to a toll free number. They arent trying to hide from anyone thats for sure. Is it because no one wants to get involved until they realize these things might actually affect them? If there is anything else going on that you want to have a say in, you better speak to your union reps now before they talk again to management. Dont expect a poll on every issue. Its costly and time consuming to organize. Speak up for yourself before something happens and let your local prez know what you want them to do for you.
(Hint- think proposed cuts - call and email them now with your opinions)

 

[Seatacus]

And once again I cant understand WHY NO ONE there expressed their views to anyone at the local.They arent trying to hide from anyone thats for sure.

For the dues we pay you would think that someone would contact us. :down:

 

[tadjr]

Are you signed up on the eline? Did you not get the WN buyout proposal back in the beginning of June asking for everyone to take a look and give an opinion? Did you not notice that the one US proposed is very similar to the WN proposal? When are people going to take responsibility for something so important as their work life? I read on the 3641 board all these people complaining about no one contacting them when there is a full page of email addresses and phone numbers to their local union. Wake up people, just because you are represented by CWA doesnt mean they're going to be holding your hand all the time. Its your responsibility to let them know what you want them to do for you, not the other way around. Just like DC politics, do you cry every time they pass a bill in DC without polling your opinion? You're paying them to represent you as well. I urge anyone in CWA to contact your local NOW and tell them what is and isnt acceptable to you in regards to the buyout and any possible future proposed contract changes. Dont sit here and complain and not contact them and then wonder why they didnt bother to ask your opinion. :down:

 

[Seatacus]

Just like DC politics, do you cry every time they pass a bill in DC without polling your opinion? You're paying them to represent you as well.

No I don't cry. But at least politicians have to earn my vote in the next election.

 

[tadjr]

PLEASE POST AND DISTRIBUTE TO YOUR CO-WORKERS
Additional stories are on www.cwa.net


7/9/04


CWA Buyout Proposal: Frequently Asked Questions


1. Why did the union take the initiative to propose a passenger service buyout? Why not wait for management to propose one?
Our experience is that management has always refused to offer a passenger service buyout (or a buyout for any other employee group for that matter), even as they furloughed 3,000 agents and reps since 9/11. If we wait for management to make a buyout offer, we'll wait a long time.


2. Management claims it needs to cut passenger service salaries, benefits, and seniority by $122 million or face another bankruptcy. How does the proposed buyout fit with that?
The buyout proposal is meant to reduce company costs by having employees at the top rate (10 or more years service) volunteer for the buyout, and at the same time create an opening for an employee at the starting rate. It is voluntary, and a much better alternative than management's goal of cutting employee's salaries, benefits and seniority.


3. Why do we think the management will agree to this buyout when they never have agreed in the past?
Because it will save the company a significant amount of money and help avoid another bankruptcy. We can show them how to do that and at the same time provide an attractive buyout option for those who choose to take it. Obviously, the management will not agree to the buyout proposal if it doesn't save the company a significant amount of money.


4. What are the factors that go into the buyout proposal?
We are trying to propose a buyout plan that is fair, voluntary, and attractive enough to get volunteers, but at the same time saves the company enough money so that they will be willing to agree to it.


5. Could anyone be forced to give up their job and take the buyout proposal?
No, it would be strictly voluntary. Those who thought it was good for them could decide to take it; those who preferred to stay on the job would ignore it.


6. Why not propose a buyout just for the most senior employees?
That wouldn't make sense if we're trying to lower the overall wage costs, since everybody makes the same rate of pay after ten years, whether you have 11 years of service or 35 years of service. Anyone with ten years or more would be eligible and they can decide whether they choose to take it.


7. What is the proposed basic buyout offer?
It has been posted at www.cwa.net and distributed in the workplace. The basic offer is $1,000 per year of service, plus flying privileges. To qualify you must have at least 10 years of service.
Those already eligible for retiree medical (age 55) would, of course, keep their retiree medical eligibility. Those within 5 years of retiree eligibility (age 50) could get retiree medical buy giving up half the buyout cash ($500 per year of service). All others would receive $1,000 per year of service, or only $500 per year of service if they also choose one year of medical coverage.


8. Why not throw in retiree medical coverage for everyone who takes the buyout?
Retiree medical costs the company about $8,500 per year. If they were to provide that for anybody who left the company, regardless of age, until they reach age 65 that would wipe out any cost savings for the company, making it likely they would reject the buyout proposal.


For example: an employee who is age 45 with 20 years' service would receive a buyout of $20,000 ($1,000 per each year of service). If you add retiree medical that would be another $170,800 worth of medical benefits ($8,500 annual retiree medical costs until age 65 – that's 20 years). That would be a $190,000 buyout. It is hard to imagine management would agree to that.

Another example: an employee who is age 30 with 10 years' service would receive a buyout of $10,000 ($1,000 per each year of service). If you add retiree medical that would be another $299,000 worth of medical benefits ($8,500 annual retiree medical costs until age 65 – that's 35 years). It is hard to imagine management would take that proposal seriously.
9. How did CWA come up with the buyout proposal?
Your elected CWA representatives studied the Southwest Airlines buyout proposal, discussed the idea, debated it, asked for members' input and feedback, asked CWA research analysts to cost-out the savings and the benefits of the plan, and then proposed it to management.


10. How has management responded to the buyout proposal?
They insist they are open to the idea and are considering our proposals. However, we haven't received any specific agreement, feedback or counterproposal from management.

 

[D M G]

Those within 5 years of retiree eligibility (age 50) could get retiree medical buy giving up half the buyout cash ($500 per year of service).

For example: an employee who is age 45 with 20 years' service would receive a buyout of $20,000 ($1,000 per each year of service).

Another example: an employee who is age 30 with 10 years' service would receive a buyout of $10,000 ($1,000 per each year of service).

The CWA's own examples are wrong. Anyone under 55 that wants retiree medical has to give up half the buyout cash. The 45yo/20yr and 30yo/10yr agent's buyout cash should have been cut in half.

The line has to be drawn somewhere for the buyouts to include retiree medical benefits, and for the CWA to even use a 30yo/10yr agent as an example is just crazy. No one in their right mind would expect to see that in the proposal. What they do want to see is something for the agents that are 45-49 years old with 20-30 years of service. The CWA wanted people to look at the WN buyout, well where is the sick time conversion for medical benefits such as WN offered? Why not allow agents that are 45-49 to give up the buyout cash in exchange for medical coverage?

Here's an example of how the company will save money:

45yo/20yr agent $20.00/hr = $41,600/year

New hire $9.00/hr = $18,720/year

1st year salary savings = $22,880

Retiree medical cost = $8,500

Total 1st year savings = $14,300 per retiree.

There are a ton of agents that would fall into this category and take the buyout with just medical and flying benefits. The savings would be slightly higher because the company would also save money on the new hires having less vacation time. Obviously the cost of retiree medical will go up, as will the new hires rate of pay, but it would take quite a few years to catch up to the money saved.

The CWA has been catching a lot of flack for their proposal, and rightly so. Keep up with the calls, letters, and emails to the CWA and your Reps. Hopefully the CWA will pull, and amend, the buyout proposal.

 

[wizzz]

Please correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that people need to remember that the only thing concrete or guaranteed in a buyout of this sort is the cash in hand...medical and flight benefits seem to be subject to future changes, more or less at the whim of the company...rules have already changed for past retirees re: flight benefits...and look at the changes United is making to retirees medical after the fact...Nothing is guaranteed except the up-front cash...

 

[D M G]

Please correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that people need to remember that the only thing concrete or guaranteed in a buyout of this sort is the cash in hand...medical and flight benefits seem to be subject to future changes, more or less at the whim of the company...rules have already changed for past retirees re: flight benefits...and look at the changes United is making to retirees medical after the fact...Nothing is guaranteed except the up-front cash...

You're right.

 

[Seatacus]

medical and flight benefits seem to be subject to future changes, more or less at the whim of the company...rules have already changed for past retirees

There should be a law that retirees get no less than current employees. After retiring there is no way of voting on anything...

 

[wizzz]

I'm not particularly interested in seeing retirees get "not less than active employees"...if active employees can improve their lot, that's fine with me...I just think retirees should be able to have some confidence that what they worked 30plus years for and what they were agreeing to do that for should not be changed..there should be some type of grandfathering as is in the retirement policy now (CWA) re insurance....those hired after a certain date in, I believe 1992, are not eligible to retain the health insurance after age 65..or Medicare kicks in...those hired before that date will continue to be eligible for coverage thru the company as a supplement of sorts...The retiree health insurance is a benefit offered...if the company does not want to offer that benefit, perhaps the Union should negotiate something to offset the fact that retirees will have to find other insurance..perhaps increase matches to 401 to have more at retirement to pay for private insurance...Just a thought...but if you look at total employee compensation, you can not just look at hourly wages...Many people work at lower hourly wages because of salary being offset by medical insurance benefits...

 

[N628AU]

These examples assume the company will have a flat rate for retiree medical at $8,500 annually in perpetuity. That is only true if (1) the retiree will pay the double digit percentage annual increase companies are seeing annually in benefit costs, or (2) the company cuts benefits annually to keep the cost at $8,500. The math seems to simple to me in these examples.

 

[deltawatch]

Here's the way this deal works for a 50 year old guy with 10 years service -vs- a 48 year old guy with 27 years service.

Employee age 50
Hire date 1994 (10 years service) takes buyout.
Heathcare is $8500 per year until 65 = $127,500
Plus $500 for each year of service, $5000.
Total 132,500.

Employee 48 years old
Hire date is 1978 (27 years seniorty) takes buyout.
The way this buyout reads he gets $1000.00 for each year
Total 27,000 .... thats it????

THAT'S $105,500 more to the guy with 10 years ????????
Where's the fairness???????

__________________________________________________

Why not offer Age 48
Seniorty 27 years this deal
Heathcare until 65 = $144,500
No lump sum
Total 144,500

________________________________________________

Difference in company cost $12,000
Difference in age 24 months
Difference is seniorty 17 years