IAMPF General discussions

[MetalMover]

So advocate to your President that you're demanding geographic pay or a COLA.

You guys supposedly have the ball now you keep saying. So start running with it.

We tried that on one previous TA...Not only was TUL against it, but the MIA local president was against it as well because MIA would not get as much s NY or CA would have.

 

[WeAAsles]

We tried that on one previous TA...Not only was TUL against it, but the MIA local president was against it as well because MIA would not get as much s NY or CA would have.

So you try again. The way the negotiations will work is different this time. Majority rule. And maybe you should have thought about making a few contacts and friends over on the IAM side instead of bashing them the last few months?

Not difficult at all to get phone numbers over there.

 

[NYer]

The IAMNPF comes right out of the member's hourly pay. $2 an hour for $80 a week. So it is costing them $4160 a year. Now to say that US Airways is contributing the $2 an hour on each participant's behalf is misleading.
Suppose your union negotiated $30 an hour. Then they take $2 an hour from your paycheck to fund YOUR pension.....Did the company fund it or did YOU?
Now if your union negotiated $30 an hour and THEN added $2 to fund your pension, that is an entirely different scenario.

So you're saying the IAM negotiated a pay raise then they take $2 an hour from that in order to fund their Pension?

So this language in the CBA is just window dressing? "US Airways shall contribute to the I.A.M. National Pension Fund, National Pension Plan in accordance with the following terms..."

 

[MetalMover]

So you're saying the IAM negotiated a pay raise then they take $2 an hour from that in order to fund their Pension?

So this language in the CBA is just window dressing? "US Airways shall contribute to the I.A.M. National Pension Fund, National Pension Plan in accordance with the following terms..."

That's it. Think about it...They negotiate a wage rate then say they are contributing $2 an hour to fund it.... Where did the $2 come from?

 

[WeAAsles]

That's it. Think about it...They negotiate a wage rate then say they are contributing $2 an hour to fund it.... Where did the $2 come from?

And where do you think you're 5.5% match comes from? The apples and oranges both look pretty similar.

 

[NYer]

That's it. Think about it...They negotiate a wage rate then say they are contributing $2 an hour to fund it.... Where did the $2 come from?

So that means the $2 contributed towards your 401K match, if you're taking advantage of it, is also coming from your wages?

 

[MetalMover]

And where do you think you're 5.5% match comes from? The apples and oranges both look pretty similar.

Not really....The IAMNPF specifically says $2 an hour will fund the pension. The $2 is standard. A 401k is whatever you choose to put in. But using the hourly figure, don't tell me US Airways didn't consider this because they were the lowest paid. And they are behind us still by a few cents. It was sold that the company would fund it. Imagine that, a company funding a pension run by a loser union. 
You are better off upping your 401k contribution by the $80 a week rather than letting the IAM run it. Did they not learn anything from the IBT and it's mishandling of pensions in specific states?
 
What would you rather have? the 5.5% match or 5.5% raise and no match?

 

[MetalMover]

So that means the $2 contributed towards your 401K match, if you're taking advantage of it, is also coming from your wages?

Is it a $2 match for everyone or is everyone different?
That's why you count on your union to figure this in when they negotiate wage increases...instead of "OK, WE'LL GIVE YOU A $2 AN hOUR RAISE BUT WE WILL USE THAT $2 TO FUND YOUR PENSIONS...
 
But the loser unions are afraid to ask for anything more than what they are being offered because, after all, "we don't to hurt them financially."

 

[MetalMover]

And where do you think you're 5.5% match comes from? The apples and oranges both look pretty similar.

 

So that means the $2 contributed towards your 401K match, if you're taking advantage of it, is also coming from your wages?

So what you are saying is that a company goes BK.....TWICE...because it didn't work out the first time...terminates the pensions because they were too expensive and then turns around and funds a union administered pension plan?
Incurring ALL the costs AFTER terminating the plan?
 
Ok it doesn't come from the participant's wages......"Ok we would love to give you guys $30 an hour but we are only going to give you $28 an hour because we are funding your pensions..."
 
I got it now....

 

[WeAAsles]

Not really....The IAMNPF specifically says $2 an hour will fund the pension. The $2 is standard. A 401k is whatever you choose to put in. But using the hourly figure, don't tell me US Airways didn't consider this because they were the lowest paid. And they are behind us still by a few cents. It was sold that the company would fund it. Imagine that, a company funding a pension run by a loser union. 
You are better off upping your 401k contribution by the $80 a week rather than letting the IAM run it. Did they not learn anything from the IBT and it's mishandling of pensions in specific states?
 
What would you rather have? the 5.5% match or 5.5% raise and no match?

Ok so now you're sure which formula costs the company more? The flat rate over the flexible rate. Let's use Fleet as a formula. What if they offered a buyout and half our workforce accepted it. They hire 4000 new hires most of which across the country start at $9.00 per hour. The company contributes 3% of their gross wages into the 401. Many of them believe they can't afford to put in 5.5% so the company gets to keep that for at least X amount of years.

Now would you still say that a flat rate is compensating them less?

Your basing your formula on you and assuming everyone is in the same position as you are to take advantage of the match. Even Bob said there were 1400 members not doing so. What level on the pay scale are the average amount of those members at?

 

[MetalMover]

Ok so now you're sure which formula costs the company more? The flat rate over the flexible rate. Let's use Fleet as a formula. What if they offered a buyout and half our workforce accepted it. They hire 4000 new hires most of which across the country start at $9.00 per hour. The company contributes 3% of their gross wages into the 401. Many of them believe they can't afford to put in 5.5% so the company gets to keep that for at least X amount of years.

Now would you still say that a flat rate is compensating them less?

Your basing your formula on you and assuming everyone is in the same position as you are to take advantage of the match. Even Bob said there were 1400 members not doing so. What level on the pay scale are the average amount of those members at?

You're using lower pay as an example. A percentage of a lower amount is lower than the higher. Same with salaries, a 5% increase on a six figure income is way more than on a $40000 salary.
 
Do you remember PRE BK when we could view our total values? The contribution towards my DB amount was way less than the 5.5% match...

 

[WeAAsles]

You're using lower pay as an example. A percentage of a lower amount is lower than the higher. Same with salaries, a 5% increase on a six figure income is way more than on a $40000 salary.
 
Do you remember PRE BK when we could view our total values? The contribution towards my DB amount was way less than the 5.5% match...

I'm not sure exactly but I would have to assume that our collective group that will be represented by the association probably numbers over 25000 people? Again unless you know what AA equates to be the average amount it spends for the 401k match then you cannot say with certainty which one costs the company more? You can't and neither can I .

The conversation is not based on you who has said he's retiring soon. Of course for you getting into the IAMPF would be silly. But again not everyone is in your position and the conversation is not meant to revolve around you (Or me either for that matter)

The conversation is meant to be about "choice". Something you seem to prefer people never have at all when it comes to this subject.

 

[1AA]

The 401k match was compensation for the frozen pensions in BK. Now we are arguing over whether the money going to the iam pension will cut into our pay in lieu of the match. So the match compensation will be negotiated away for a cut in future pay raises to go to the loser iam pension that no one at AA wanted in the first place. So if the association forces us into the pension scam AA will cut our pay potential for a fixed $2 an hour contribution versus a 5.5% match which is compounded with O/T and holiday pay. Any of you geniuses care to figure out which option pays more money? I'll take the one with no restrictions that is portable. With the IAM plan we are their slave no matter where we work after AA. There is a good chance we may never see the promised payout with the SCAM IAM PLAN. So why are we even discussing this in the fist place is beyond me.

 

[WeAAsles]

The 401k match was compensation for the frozen pensions in BK. Now we are arguing over whether the money going to the iam pension will cut into our pay in lieu of the match. So the match compensation will be negotiated away for a cut in future pay raises to go to the loser iam pension that no one at AA wanted in the first place. So if the association forces us into the pension scam AA will cut our pay potential for a fixed $2 an hour contribution versus a 5.5% match which is compounded with O/T and holiday pay. Any of you geniuses care to figure out which option pays more money? I'll take the one with no restrictions that is portable. With the IAM plan we are their slave no matter where we work after AA. There is a good chance we may never see the promised payout with the SCAM IAM PLAN. So why are we even discussing this in the fist place is beyond me.

Ah yes so we have extreme confidence in being involved in the scam known as Wall Street huh? Yep that's always laying those golden eggs. 2008?

DE-VER-SI-FY.

 

[WeAAsles]

And NO ONE is saying what anyone should do or what may wind up, maybe, perhaps, who knows, potentially be negotiated, offered, TA'd or ratified.

But then again some of these paranoid doom prophets already have it all figured out.

Check under your beds tonight kiddos. The boogy man may be out to get ya?