JCBA Negotiations and updates for AA Fleet

[bob@las-AA]

Ok OldGuy nothing personal to this man because I'm sure in most areas he's quite capable. But if he really has been telling you the things you said without filling in all the blanks, I'm going to continue to stick with doing my own Retirement financial planning and research.

https://twu514.org/blog/2014/08/07/twu-local-514-retirement-counselor-mark-loeber/

https://www.wealthminder.com/financial-advisors-tulsa-OK/mark-loeber/314082

Try this weez.

 

[WeAAsles]

Let me give you a scenario:

Assumptions
Employee A is topped out and earns $100000 per year.
Employee gets to keep 5.5% match on his 401k.
He has zero in his 401k today.
He will retire 10 years after CBA is reached.
He will start investing then after CBA reached.
He puts 5.5% in 401k and gets 5.5% match instead of pension.
In 10 years at 7% average returns he would have $160,000
At retirement he could take out $9600 per year for 25 years
After 25 years employee is out of 401k savings.

Employee B is topped out and earns $100000 per year.
Employee gets to keep current pension and invests 5.5% into 401k.
He has zero in his 401k today.
He will retire 10 years after CBA is reached.
He will start investing then after CBA reached.
He puts 5.5% in 401k, does not get match, doesn't get increase to pension.
In 10 years at 7% average returns he would have $75000
At retirement he could take out $4500 plus $5808 per year for 25 years
That's $10308 for 25 years.
After 25 years employee is out of 401k savings.
Employee gets $5808 per year until he dies.

P. Rez

Spike that ball Rez. Rock and Roll. You and I are thinking simpatico.

I put 20% currently into my 401k and get a 5.5% match for a total of 25.5% going in. Now the hope being perhaps to gain the IAMPF and maybe at least keep the UAL comparison 3% Match so if I want to continue with the 5.5% I only have to put in 2.5% of whatever raises we may still receive on the JCBA.

At worse of course would be having to divert 5.5% more of my pay to keep up the 25.5% if we were only offered one or the other option. Again my wages are my own to choose how I wish to invest them?

Some of course would prefer just to have more of a Match and have quoted what the FA's are currently getting if they're over 50. That's coming to an end though in January 2019 and they then all drop to a 5.5% Match. That's a choice too that I can understand their advocacy for as well.

They also don't have confidence in the IAMPF but the truth is all retirement options are at risk and why people need to figure out what they think might work out best for them. (Roll of the dice)

People also shouldn't put the cart before the horse until they see what is offered to them.

 

[WeAAsles]

https://www.wealthminder.com/financial-advisors-tulsa-OK/mark-loeber/314082

Try this weez.

Seen it all Bob. Still not giving me this mans Educational Credentials though? Is he Legally even authorized to give out Retirement planning advice being that he's essentially a charity organization or something? Didn't it say they're a non profit or something?

Edit: It says they're a consulting firm that makes recommendations.

I'm sorry but for me I'd need a little more than that for financial planning personally.

 

[anotherdelay]

Let me give you a scenario:

Assumptions
Employee A is topped out and earns $100000 per year.
Employee gets to keep 5.5% match on his 401k.
He has zero in his 401k today.
He will retire 10 years after CBA is reached.
He will start investing then after CBA reached.
He puts 5.5% in 401k and gets 5.5% match instead of pension.
In 10 years at 7% average returns he would have $160,000
At retirement he could take out $9600 per year for 25 years
After 25 years employee is out of 401k savings.

Employee B is topped out and earns $100000 per year.
Employee gets to keep current pension and invests 5.5% into 401k.
He has zero in his 401k today.
He will retire 10 years after CBA is reached.
He will start investing then after CBA reached.
He puts 5.5% in 401k, does not get match, doesn't get increase to pension.
In 10 years at 7% average returns he would have $75000
At retirement he could take out $4500 plus $5808 per year for 25 years
That's $10308 for 25 years.
After 25 years employee is out of 401k savings.
Employee gets $5808 per year until he dies.

P. Rez

yeah, that's why i asked you what the rate of return after fees is needed to keep the pension fund solvent. and i won't ask you what the expense ratio of the fund is compared to the index funds. I also won't bother to tell you how many actively managed funds, actually outperform the indexes.

 

[anotherdelay]

Spike that ball Rez. Rock and Roll. You and I are thinking simpatico.

I put 20% currently into my 401k and get a 5.5% match for a total of 25.5% going in. Now the hope being perhaps to gain the IAMPF and maybe at least keep the UAL comparison 3% Match so if I want to continue with the 5.5% I only have to put in 2.5% of whatever raises we may still receive on the JCBA.

At worse of course would be having to divert 5.5% more of my pay to keep up the 25.5% if we were only offered one or the other option. Again my wages are my own to choose how I wish to invest them?

Some of course would prefer just to have more of a Match and have quoted what the FA's are currently getting if they're over 50. That's coming to an end though in January 2019 and they then all drop to a 5.5% Match. That's a choice too that I can understand their advocacy for as well.

They also don't have confidence in the IAMPF but the truth is all retirement options are at risk and why people need to figure out what they think might work out best for them. (Roll of the dice)

People also shouldn't put the cart before the horse until they see what is offered to them.

 

[anotherdelay]

what do you think the rate of return has to be to keep the fund solvent, and has this iampf made any cuts to pensions and if they have what was it?

 

[WeAAsles]

what do you think the rate of return has to be to keep the fund solvent, and has this iampf made any cuts to pensions and if they have what was it?

Sorry I know your handle says you're new here? But the 40% cut has been already covered to death.

Next subject.

 

[chilokie1]

Of course we should be having this conversation. Maybe you and I might be too far along in our careers where joining is not really be worth it? But we have new hires some who aren't even 20 Years Old yet here in Fleet. Why shouldn't they be given the choice if they want to join the fund?

I personally look at it as it's just another retirement option not much different then any of the other funds you pick from when you set up your choices in your 401k.

The IAMPF is an investment in the IAM continuing to draw in the people they represent into the fund, continuing to gain new membership of course and confidence in the Company's where they represent people. The IAM represents a lot of people in Aviation which is in growth mode that's forecasted to continue as the Global population explodes.

Again who knows if we'll even have the "choice" to make on our side? The Company may not be interested in making that deal and our side may wind up moving on from trying?

Sorry you are 100% wrong, maybe because I'am on M&E side we see the future differently. But
a lot of our jobs have left to non-union venders and the new AA looks like it has no intention of
bringing future work in house, can you tell me that other companies that have IAMPF members
are any different. Most of my fellow employees have lost all trust in the TWU after we were told
we would have a vote on the Ass., then were not given that option. I have found countless financial
publications that do not endorse MCPP's, and not one that have zero skin in the game. Speaking
for the membership that does not trust the TWU & have done their own research into MCPP's we
feel it is our responsibility to use our voices

 

[WeAAsles]

This is the honest reason that I'm not too concerned with going into the IAMPF myself. As you can note even though the liabilities have increased so too has the value of the fund by a Billion Dollars over two years as well.

And IATA forecast massive growth in Aviation over the next 20 years (Including the need for Aviation Maintenance Personnel) and the IAM is heavily invested in that industry.

So that means that the IAM should continue to gain new members coming into the fold?

And from what I understand when the Pension Law forced the IAMPF to draw up a new schedule (Schedule B) members still received the value they had accumulated on Schedule A up until the cutover date. Retirees already drawing from the trust saw no change.

And again NO, I don't feel that the IAMPF is for everyone especially if you know you have maybe far less than 10 years to go before you retire. But I don't and I like having my Retirement assets as diversified as possible.

That's how "I" feel. You're entitled to feel different of course.

 

[WeAAsles]

BTW note the comment on the bottom of the payouts for schedule B where it discusses that a customized schedule can be made for 10,000 or more participants in the plan based on actuarial review?

I expect that actuarial review to hopefully conclude that if all members of the Association are included in the IAMPF we can have that customized schedule that pays out more than the schedule B formula?

 

[WeAAsles]

And on that vote thing I have to say yea they screwed up on that one. They really did "think" that we were going to have to take a vote. They should have kept their yaps shut and said "We might" have to vote instead.

If you remember myself and old 700UW were both saying that we weren't going to vote. (Quite a few big arguments with some of you guys, SWAMT particularly) The reason was again and again because I read the filing to the NMB by the IAM where they argued there wasn't a need because the Association already had organized 95% of the total membership already.

I don't think it probably would have done any good anyway but I have told a friend that they should have put out a letter of explanation expressing regret that they made that error in the first place. No they really didn't believe the NMB would just certify the Association. They thought we would have to vote.

You can thank Jim Little for the agreement he signed. It was rock solid Legal and Binding.

 

[anotherdelay]

This is the honest reason that I'm not too concerned with going into the IAMPF myself. As you can note even though the liabilities have increased so too has the value of the fund by a Billion Dollars over two years as well.

And IATA forecast massive growth in Aviation over the next 20 years (Including the need for Aviation Maintenance Personnel) and the IAM is heavily invested in that industry.

So that means that the IAM should continue to gain new members coming into the fold?


good god. Hey go down to the local hotel, there's a few pyramid games going on there.

 

[anotherdelay]

twu might as well just fold into iam. unfreeze our pension, and put it into the iampf.

 

[anotherdelay]

It was rock solid Legal and Binding. like our match.

 

[chilokie1]

Let me give you a scenario:

Assumptions
Employee A is topped out and earns $100000 per year.
Employee gets to keep 5.5% match on his 401k.
He has zero in his 401k today.
He will retire 10 years after CBA is reached.
He will start investing then after CBA reached.
He puts 5.5% in 401k and gets 5.5% match instead of pension.
In 10 years at 7% average returns he would have $160,000
At retirement he could take out $9600 per year for 25 years
After 25 years employee is out of 401k savings.

Employee B is topped out and earns $100000 per year.
Employee gets to keep current pension and invests 5.5% into 401k.
He has zero in his 401k today.
He will retire 10 years after CBA is reached.
He will start investing then after CBA reached.
He puts 5.5% in 401k, does not get match, doesn't get increase to pension.
In 10 years at 7% average returns he would have $75000
At retirement he could take out $4500 plus $5808 per year for 25 years
That's $10308 for 25 years.
After 25 years employee is out of 401k savings.
Employee gets $5808 per year until he dies.

P. Rez

P Rez is forgetting a little thing called compounding interest that is the basis of any 401k
plan. He is trying to compare apples and oranges.

Actual (Not Assumption)
Employee C is topped out and earns $90,000 per year.
In 1987 Employee C earned $28,000 his first year at AA
Employee C did not believe in a perfect world and felt he needed to
fund his own retirement.
Even at $10 per hr employee C was able to put 5% in his 401k.
Over 30 years employee C was able to increase his contribution %
which also helped lower his income taxes.
And when employee C was able work overtime he found he could increase
his % again. So after 30 years (401K plans are designed long term not ten years)
Employee C is looking at a nest-egg of one mil - + (even after getting hammered by the dot-com bust)

Employee C is a real person who is debt free living in a very comfortable home in a low cost
area of the country, he still has his 25 years earned in his AA pension & SS.

Employee C's point is you cannot compare a 401K and a pension in only a 10 year cycle.