JCBA Negotiations and updates for AA Fleet

[Tim Nelson]

And I also agree with you 100%. But all I keep telling you and you have to know this as a fact. Unless the Company puts their foot down otherwise they're never going to let you get completely out of it anyway. That's completely my opinion?

So at best at least for you guys I'd LOVE to see something where you also gain a bit of a match to your 401k contributions as well. BUT you also HAVE to start putting away as much as you can into your retirement accounts on your own to try to stay ahead of any curveballs life throws at you.

20% going into my 401k means with a Nuclear bomb drop (say another BK) I can afford a 20% paycut and keep going.

Borrowing half the money I was approved for with the Credit Union on my Condo gave me another cushion.

I don't work OT or Extra hours so there's another cushion if needed? Not taking CC yet, another cushion. Hording some cash in my Savings account, another cushion.

Get what I'm saying here Tim?

Yes I do. I'm not asking to be removed from the IAMPF. I have a vested interest in it. But, I'd like the same choice, moving forward, as LAA, even if that is just a one time choice for both groups. Instead of just saying "$2 an hour is going into my IAMPF, like it or not" when I could instead choose to stop my future contributions into the IAMPF and shift them into my 401k. I've already seen that it really doesn't matter if they pimp the company for more of my benefits dumped into the IAMPF. Even if they raise it to $2hour, what is the benefit? Nobody knows. We only have history to go on and math. And that isn't a favorable indicator for those who want to believe that $2 will get them back up to $80 a month. The math and history suggest that the Trustees will have to act and so I'd rather stop increasing my benefits in the IAMPF and start increasing them in the 401k or better yet my wage. Granted, the 401k isn't for everyone.

I want choice for all.

 

[Albert]

HA HA HA are you serious? What did you do post them to death.

In other words, he knows a useful idiot when he sees one.

.......went after them with a vengeance. I will be laughing at that for a LONG time.

Weez you got to admit this is quite amusing

 

[Albert]

And I also agree with you 100%. But all I keep telling you and you have to know this as a fact. Unless the Company puts their foot down otherwise they're never going to let you get completely out of it anyway. That's completely my opinion?

So at best at least for you guys I'd LOVE to see something where you also gain a bit of a match to your 401k contributions as well. BUT you also HAVE to start putting away as much as you can into your retirement accounts on your own to try to stay ahead of any curveballs life throws at you.

20% going into my 401k means with a Nuclear bomb drop (say another BK) I can afford a 20% paycut and keep going.

Borrowing half the money I was approved for with the Credit Union on my Condo gave me another cushion.

I don't work OT or Extra hours so there's another cushion if needed? Not taking CC yet, another cushion. Hording some cash in my Savings account, another cushion.

Get what I'm saying here Tim?

Buying furniture and clothes from a "Blem scratch and dent" liquidator is another

 

[WeAAsles]

Yes I do. I'm not asking to be removed from the IAMPF. I have a vested interest in it. But, I'd like the same choice, moving forward, as LAA, even if that is just a one time choice for both groups. Instead of just saying "$2 an hour is going into my IAMPF, like it or not" when I could instead choose to stop my future contributions into the IAMPF and shift them into my 401k. I've already seen that it really doesn't matter if they pimp the company for more of my benefits dumped into the IAMPF. Even if they raise it to $2hour, what is the benefit? Nobody knows. We only have history to go on and math. And that isn't a favorable indicator for those who want to believe that $2 will get them back up to $80 a month. The math and history suggest that the Trustees will have to act and so I'd rather stop increasing my benefits in the IAMPF and start increasing them in the 401k or better yet my wage. Granted, the 401k isn't for everyone.

I want choice for all.

Take out this comment

"I've already seen that it really doesn't matter if they pimp the company for more of my benefits dumped into the IAMPF"

And this becomes one of the better posts you've made here and quite reasonable.

 

[WeAAsles]

Buying furniture and clothes from a "Blem scratch and dent" liquidator is another

Nordstrom Rack instead of Nordstrom Retail.

 

[Koolcat]

The IAMPF might be unavoidable, but being diverse might help us in the long run. Nothing is guaranteed anymore

 

[WeAAsles]

Since we're talking about the IAMPF here. This is the reason no matter how much I may think otherwise I always roll back to supporting Democrats.

http://www.vermontbiz.com/news/may/...e-bill-restore-retirement-security-10-million

 

[WeAAsles]

The Keep Our Pension Promises Act

• A simple and common-sense solution. By creating a Legacy Fund within the PBGC that is funded by partially repealing two tax breaks, KOPPA is a simple and common-sense solution to the multiemployer pension crisis.
• Creation of PBGC Legacy Fund for multiemployer plans. KOPPA would create a Legacy Fund in the PBGC. Underfunded multiemployer pension plans would apply to receive money from the Legacy Fund to help pay retirees the benefits they earned. When an application is accepted, the money provided by the Legacy Fund is combined with employer contributions and investment income and should be sufficient enough to enable plans in the even worst financial shape – those like the Central States Pension Fund – to cover benefit costs on a year-to-year basis.
• How is KOPPA paid for?The Legacy Fund created by KOPPA would be funded bypartially repealing two tax breaks that ONLY benefit wealthy individuals. One of the measures would change the tax laws to ensure that rich real estate and art speculators would have to pay taxes when they trade one property for another. The second measure would limit to $5 million the amount that individuals can save in 401(k) plans or in IRAs. Both of these proposals would raise enough money to pay for the Legacy Fund on a year-to-year basis.
• KOPPA is not a taxpayer bailout. The Keep Our Pension Promises Act of 2017 is an employee and employer assistance program. KOPPA would ensure that retiree pensions are safe – thereby ensuring that retirees can remain productive citizens, contributing to their families and buying goods and services in the economy. KOPPA helps employers by relieving them of crushing liabilities,ensuring that they will keep contributing to multiemployerplans, thereby helping the economy and workers and retirees to thrive.

http://www.pensionrights.org/public...-our-pension-promises-act-2017-talking-points

 

[WeAAsles]

The IAMPF might be unavoidable, but being diverse might help us in the long run. Nothing is guaranteed anymore

Still guaranteed.

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

The housing bubble collapse was a scam with shady loan practices and ARM's putting borrowers under water and destroying all their built up equity and credit when those borrowers had to default on their loans due to lost jobs and income under that situation.

What caused the housing bubble is Bill Clinton's meddling of the Community Reinvestment Act and banks use of credit default swaps (the real purpose of these is to clean up a bank's balance sheet) to cover what they knew were bad loans.

 

[charlie Brown]

Admittedly, you didnt claim that members will know the benefit amounts and im glad you are concerned. I just hope, from your leadership position, that you advocate for choice, and not just for the laa.
The plan, like all pensions are scams nowadays. Companies got out of pensions after they stole all our money. Unions steal as well. If someone wants or needs their future contributions to go to the iamnpf then thats their prerogative and fine but i dont like the idea where i wont possibly be able to choose.

As far as credibility and who listens to me, its not for me to say. I dont seek credibility.

Tim
You are 100% correct we should be held accountable In our positions. I have no problem with that at all. But don't state things that you aren't aware of like I would not question Martinez about our pension cut and the mishandling of funds. Or your comment about the pension guarantee that I supposedly said that you already backtracked on and said I didn't do. That's what I have issues with, because it's simply not true. Now I have to admit that I didnt report back to you on these issues, nor did I make a you tube video for all to see, Or post all over a Facebook forum. But that doesn't mean they didn't get done. But I guess since you admit you don't really care about credibility, then you don't really care if they got done, you only care that you can state whatever you want to state whether it's true or not.

 

[WeAAsles]

Tim
You are 100% correct we should be held accountable In our positions. I have no problem with that at all. But don't state things that you aren't aware of like I would not question Martinez about our pension cut and the mishandling of funds. Or your comment about the pension guarantee that I supposedly said that you already backtracked on and said I didn't do. That's what I have issues with, because it's simply not true. Now I have to admit that I didnt report back to you on these issues, nor did I make a you tube video for all to see, Or post all over a Facebook forum. But that doesn't mean they didn't get done. But I guess since you admit you don't really care about credibility, then you don't really care if they got done, you only care that you can state whatever you want to state whether it's true or not.

Is Tim one of your "Handlers" that you're supposed to report to?

Can someone please send me the organization charts so I can figure out who the Handlers and Drones are?

 

[cltrat]

most of the drones don't post anymore at least not unless there's an officer election

 

[WeAAsles]

most of the drones don't post anymore at least not unless there's an officer election

I've noticed myself that most of the people who post here I think just like to see how many posts they can write with the same complaints over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over.

And then they gripe over and over X rince and repeat.

 

[charlie Brown]

Is Tim one of your "Handlers" that you're supposed to report to?

Can someone please send me the organization charts so I can figure out who the Handlers and Drones are?

Haha
Look I'm not saying I'm not accountable to Tim. All the District officers should be accountable to our members. But Tim could have found out if I said something to Martinez about our pension issue. I assured many of the members in clt that I would address it with him whenever i seen him, and I did that. But it's not important to him if it was done or not, he would rather post that I wouldn't do it. It helps him get his point across better. But at the same time he says he's not concerned about credibility. Tim has had my cell number for years now. He could have called me anytime to see if any of us had addressed our pension issue with Martinez. Because I'm not the only district officer that has. But like I said, that's not what it's about really to him. And it's not about holding us accountable. If it was then he would use his sources to find out if we were really doing our job or not. It's about him being able to make his accusations whether they are accurate or not.