IAMPF General discussions

[swamt]

 
How'd you reach that conclusion?

Simple math actually...
 

Are you a kid who has at least 20 years left to go?

It's not just kids who have at least 20 years left.  Some folks have been forced to look for other work and start all over.  Matter fact we now have plenty of excellent and smart mechanics here at SWA that came from AA to start all over after 18, 20, 24, and even 26 years with AA.  And these are grown men, and yes some of them may very easily have another 20 years left to ge just because they had to start all over.  Be careful of your words you use...
 

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.

C'mon man. What ever the US mechanics are making right now, it is $2 per hour less than what they would be making if they had no pension and had a 401K match.
 

Semantics....Does it amount to $2 an hour or not?

Of course it does. The $2 per hour never changes unless the union nego's a new hourly rate increase to be added to the pension.  Or if the company is successful in freezing or eliminating the pensions.
 

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?

The total amount that each mechanic would have received.  700 is correct, the entire pay and bennie package has a total price tag on it.  What your nego. cmte decides to do with it or distribute it is entirely up to them in your case...
 

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

Some are saying no. Because the company pays for it. But that $2 being contributed by the company comes directly from the "pie" of the total cost to pay that certain group, just like 700 has stated...

 

[N617P]

The $2.00 per hour was was in leu of the 3% 401k match negotiated in the LUS 2008 JCBA
That we voted in by a majority.... Remember the Democratic way! It's not a Scam it's a benefit that the membership wanted!

 

[N617P]

401K Match or Defined Benefit Pension. It's Not F*#king Rocket Science!!!
I Don't Live in a Low cost area like Tulsa. We need our hourly salary. Putting in the Max to your 401K isn't an option for a good percent of our membership. The DBP gives you the ability to do both. Have a conversation with a retirement specialist. The ones I've talked with have looked at the numbers and advise the DBP for MY Situation!

 

[1AA]

401K Match or Defined Benefit Pension. It's Not F*#king Rocket Science!!!
I Don't Live in a Low cost area like Tulsa. We need our hourly salary. Putting in the Max to your 401K isn't an option for a good percent of our membership. The DBP gives you the ability to do both. Have a conversation with a retirement specialist. The ones I've talked with have looked at the numbers and advise the DBP for MY Situation!

Maybe for the USAir guys but not us at AA. We are mostly over 50 and many closer to 65. Many of us have been dumping money in our 401k for years and the match will boost that up some. Add the frozen pension and SS payouts we are better off than starting new from day one with the IAM pension. The IAM pension will remove the company match which is compounded with O/T and holiday pay as well as picking up hours. The 401K is portable. Less restrictive. It's my money not the IAM pensions money telling me when and how much I can receive. Once the IAM gets my money I am a slave to them no matter where I am employed. It's a horrible deal for the AA guys. Wait until negotiations start and the two sides battle it out over the pension issue. It may be a good deal for the USAir guys but not AA. This is where the negotiators should be working on keeping both plans so we can move forward in negotiations. That won't happen because the unions and the iam pension fund are all money hungry.

 

[WeAAsles]

401K Match or Defined Benefit Pension. It's Not F*#king Rocket Science!!!
I Don't Live in a Low cost area like Tulsa. We need our hourly salary. Putting in the Max to your 401K isn't an option for a good percent of our membership. The DBP gives you the ability to do both. Have a conversation with a retirement specialist. The ones I've talked with have looked at the numbers and advise the DBP for MY Situation!

Exactly why I wanted to have this conversation. To try and figure out what's best ultimately for MY situation if I'm (We) are offered participation into the fund? 

Right now I'm leaning more towards not participating in the IAMPF if offered against keeping my 5.5% match? One of the reasons is at least for Fleet currently the contributions ($1.15 and not for any extra hours) is too low. If that changes in the JCBA I'll reconsider. And I don't work OT or extra hours.

So right now my idea (plan) is to retire at 62, (12 more years) draw the 20 year option out of my Frozen Pension (It pays 50% more but drops like a stone after 20) and subsidize myself with my 401k until either 67 or 70 and start drawing on my Social Security. That's my plan but if I'm still healthy at 62 that could be modified to stay longer if I chose? I'm putting 20% into my 401k currently and plan on bringing that up to a total of 25% when we get raises to adjust to that.

Now IF we are offered participation into the IAMPF and they bring up the contributions what I would like to do (maybe) and would like to know if I could? Defer collecting till 65 to avoid any percentage hits on it. Does the plan allow that? So IF I joined in I could leave at 62, take my 20 year option on my Frozen pension, subsidize myself with my 401, begin collection of my IAM pension at 65, then collect my SS at either 67 or 70 and I should still have plenty left over in my 401 that I shouldn't need to touch and could sit there and grow over time. (Maybe I'll live to 100?, doubt it but who knows)

But anyway that's why I wanted to start this discussion. So ideas and possibilities could at least be discussed and not just ignored or flipped off by the fear mongers out there. To talk about individual choice. 

 

[WeAAsles]

Maybe for the USAir guys but not us at AA. We are mostly over 50 and many closer to 65. Many of us have been dumping money in our 401k for years and the match will boost that up some. Add the frozen pension and SS payouts we are better off than starting new from day one with the IAM pension. The IAM pension will remove the company match which is compounded with O/T and holiday pay as well as picking up hours. The 401K is portable. Less restrictive. It's my money not the IAM pensions money telling me when and how much I can receive. Once the IAM gets my money I am a slave to them no matter where I am employed. It's a horrible deal for the AA guys. Wait until negotiations start and the two sides battle it out over the pension issue. It may be a good deal for the USAir guys but not AA. This is where the negotiators should be working on keeping both plans so we can move forward in negotiations. That won't happen because the unions and the iam pension fund are all money hungry.

For you guys in maintenance I do see one thing that I don't like. That's the part about possibly not being able to continue in your profession if you desire after you leave AA because the IAMPF will place you on hold until you decide to no longer continue. When you retire you may grow bored and decide you really miss the tinkering on aircraft? I'm sure there are times you really enjoy your work? I could easily see some people choosing to go back to work later on and work in a small airport maybe on corporate Jet's. So yes it would weigh very heavily on my mind if I was in your career field.

As for me I'm 100% positive that I'm not going to get bored lifting bags and request to come back to work at some low cost outfit for crap money. If I have a future itch just to keep busy I'd probably apply for Costco or something? I don't think the IAMPF would restrict me in doing that? But it's a question I would like to know? Or would I have to find something off the books so I can keep it a secret?

So you see 1AA I agree that it's not for everyone and I'm certainly not trying to sell it or say that it is.

 

[1AA]

For you guys in maintenance I do see one thing that I don't like. That's the part about possibly not being able to continue in your profession if you desire after you leave AA because the IAMPF will place you on hold until you decide to no longer continue. When you retire you may grow bored and decide you really miss the tinkering on aircraft? I'm sure there are times you really enjoy your work? I could easily see some people choosing to go back to work later on and work in a small airport maybe on corporate Jet's. So yes it would weigh very heavily on my mind if I was in your career field.
As for me I'm 100% positive that I'm not going to get bored lifting bags and request to come back to work at some low cost outfit for crap money. If I have a future itch just to keep busy I'd probably apply for Costco or something? I don't think the IAMPF would restrict me in doing that? But it's a question I would like to know? Or would I have to find something off the books so I can keep it a secret?
So you see 1AA I agree that it's not for everyone and I'm certainly not trying to sell it or say that it is.

If anyone wants to work after they leave AA they better read every detail in the IAM pension fund about working and receiving benefits. The ibt had a restriction that if you worked anywhere that a teamsters member was represented regardless of type of job your benefits would be held back. Care to guess what the IAM pension fund might say in this similar scenerio? Too many restrictions on how, when, where, and so on is no way to plan a retirement. 401k and our AA pension has far less restrictions. We have a head start with what we have been accruing and contributing. Like I said before to start new with the IAM pension and lose the match makes no financial sense.

 

[WeAAsles]

If anyone wants to work after they leave AA they better read every detail in the IAM pension fund about working and receiving benefits. The ibt had a restriction that if you worked anywhere that a teamsters member was represented regardless of type of job your benefits would be held back. Care to guess what the IAM pension fund might say in this similar scenario? Too many restrictions on how, when, where, and so on is no way to plan a retirement. 401k and our AA pension has far less restrictions. We have a head start with what we have been accruing and contributing. Like I said before to start new with the IAM pension and lose the match makes no financial sense.

Agreed on much of what you wrote but again it's not a one size fits all option. I can see it being a much better idea for Fleet members especially those who feel like they can't afford to put anything into their 401k because they are living life to their max wages or even beyond their means. If Bob is right and there really are 1400 members currently not taking advantage of the max potential these people HAVE to get into something or they're going to doom themselves later in life? (I know a few of those people right now, sad)

I can understand somewhat why the IAMPF would restrict you if you get in to another company that has the IAMPF and are going to start accumulating again. But as far as going back into your profession that you were educated for and being penalized for that, that's ridiculous. Whether or not that is IAM or anything else as long as there is no IAMPF in sight there.

Or I guess you guys could always go to work in a Foreign Country that needs Aircraft Mechanics and the only way the fund administrators would find out you're working again would be if you were dumb enough to tell them?

 

[MetalMover]

Exactly why I wanted to have this conversation. To try and figure out what's best ultimately for MY situation if I'm (We) are offered participation into the fund? 

Right now I'm leaning more towards not participating in the IAMPF if offered against keeping my 5.5% match? One of the reasons is at least for Fleet currently the contributions ($1.15 and not for any extra hours) is too low. If that changes in the JCBA I'll reconsider. And I don't work OT or extra hours.

So right now my idea (plan) is to retire at 62, (12 more years) draw the 20 year option out of my Frozen Pension (It pays 50% more but drops like a stone after 20) and subsidize myself with my 401k until either 67 or 70 and start drawing on my Social Security. That's my plan but if I'm still healthy at 62 that could be modified to stay longer if I chose? I'm putting 20% into my 401k currently and plan on bringing that up to a total of 25% when we get raises to adjust to that.

Now IF we are offered participation into the IAMPF and they bring up the contributions what I would like to do (maybe) and would like to know if I could? Defer collecting till 65 to avoid any percentage hits on it. Does the plan allow that? So IF I joined in I could leave at 62, take my 20 year option on my Frozen pension, subsidize myself with my 401, begin collection of my IAM pension at 65, then collect my SS at either 67 or 70 and I should still have plenty left over in my 401 that I shouldn't need to touch and could sit there and grow over time. (Maybe I'll live to 100?, doubt it but who knows)

But anyway that's why I wanted to start this discussion. So ideas and possibilities could at least be discussed and not just ignored or flipped off by the fear mongers out there. To talk about individual choice. 

This may answer part of your question.
Go to page 16. "Early Unreduced Retirement Pension at age 62"
http://mypension.iamnpf.org/media/13829/IAM_SPD_11.pdf

 

[WeAAsles]

This may answer part of your question.
Go to page 16. "Early Unreduced Retirement Pension at age 62"
http://mypension.iamnpf.org/media/13829/IAM_SPD_11.pdf

Thanks Metal. Now see more questions. I know that the IAM has said they will waive the vesting period but will they credit me with my full AA years of service which would equal 32 when I'm 62? Or will I only be credited with 12 years and would not qualify for the 30 and out which would provide me no deductions for collecting right then and there?

My accumulations for a monetary payout I understand would still only be the length of time I was actually in, which in my case would be 12 years.

 

[MetalMover]

Thanks Metal. Now see more questions. I know that the IAM has said they will waive the vesting period but will they credit me with my full AA years of service which would equal 32 when I'm 62? Or will I only be credited with 12 years and would not qualify for the 30 and out which would provide me no deductions for collecting right then and there?

My accumulations for a monetary payout I understand would still only be the length of time I was actually in, which in my case would be 12 years.

Even though they said the vesting period would be waived and given full credit, I don't see how anyone who enters the plan would get a full benefit not having contributed for the entire time..If you had contributed 12 years. I cannot see earning more than what would be owed you.  Sometimes these published explanations are confusing. 

 

[WeAAsles]

Even though they said the vesting period would be waived and given full credit, I don't see how anyone who enters the plan would get a full benefit not having contributed for the entire time..If you had contributed 12 years. I cannot see earning more than what would be owed you.  Sometimes these published explanations are confusing.

"Full credit" should mean your years of service with AA then. That would grant you the ability to take advantage of that 30 and out at an unreduced rate, or some of those other formulas for 20 years.

I can almost certainly guarantee that it doesn't mean years of service for accumulations of benefits. If you haven't put anything in it would be crazy to assume you would get such a substantial payout.

700UW could explain it as he knows other groups who have gone through it before.

 

[MetalMover]

"Full credit" should mean your years of service with AA then. That would grant you the ability to take advantage of that 30 and out at an unreduced rate, or some of those other formulas for 20 years.

I can almost certainly guarantee that it doesn't mean years of service for accumulations of benefits. If you haven't put anything in it would be crazy to assume you would get such a substantial payout.

700UW could explain it as he knows other groups who have gone through it before.

You're probably right. But if you're talking 12 years, I personally would stay away from it. And I have less than that to go.

 

[ThirdSeatHero]

This may answer part of your question.
Go to page 16. "Early Unreduced Retirement Pension at age 62"
http://mypension.iamnpf.org/media/13829/IAM_SPD_11.pdf

 
When the IAM was trying to peddle this when they still represented mechanics at UAL, this was always one of THE major issues...
 
Top of page 32
 

If you return to work after you have retired and while you are receiving a pension from the National
Pension Plan, your pension may be suspended, depending upon your age and the type of work
you are doing.

 
Then the draconian cuts made possible by the recent Multiemployer Pension Reform Act of 2014 in cases of looming insolvency, no thanks.

 

[dfw gen]

The only problem is that I BELEIVE fleett setvice at american already make more then fleet service at delra.wouldn't count on a big raise., unless of course the twu sells out maintenance for fleet. Like usual.