JCBA Negotiations and updates for AA Fleet

[Traymark]

P. Rez
If you bring back a TA with the same 5.5% match that we currently have for our 401K,
what the helll are you guys doing at that table????

Lets start assuming that it will be a 9.9% Contribution at a MINIMUM.
The same language the FA's got is a bare minimum, and quite frankly, it should be better than that as the companies financial position has improved Dramatically since they gave that language to the FA's back in 2013.

If we cannot expect to make major gains in compensation items after the company has enjoyed 5 years now of record profits, when, exactly, can we expect to make them???

We should be getting a 11 or 12% contribution and it should be permanent ,not sun-setted after a number of years.
The pilots enjoy a contribution, a loaf of bread cost the same for everyone, brother.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Tim,

You didn't answer my question the other day about whether Union leaders or advocates should walk away from pensions. Current pensioners will certainly suffer if Unions stayed away from pensions. That includes us, so what do we do? Fight for everyone or fold? If more people stood up and fought for pensions including non-Union employees, pensions wouldn't be more solid for all Americans? For the following reasons, I personally find it tough to give up wanting more for all:

1. Pensions were still given to employees during the Great Depression. If they had them then, they can now.
2. 401k's were established to supplement pensions. Corporate America has sold Americans on a bad deal. Do we just sit back and accept?
3. If you don't get an automatic contribution for a 401k and it is a match or Company allows an opt out, you are leaving money on the table.
4. Company has always wanted us all in a 401k instead of a pension. This alone should signal to anyone a red flag. Why don't companies want to offer pensions anymore? They don't want you to stay.

I understand the concern that people have with a Union pension plan based on all the negative publicity, but gosh dang it, it is wrong to not fight for pensions for everyone. I find it morally and ethically wrong not to advocate for this right to have a good retirement. The 401k alone is not sufficient for the majority of Americans. Does anyone read up on what the average American has saved for retirement? It's not good.

P. Rez

I thought the answer was assumed? No, I don't want the IAM to scrap the IAM pension. Why would I want that? Yes, I hope as many TWU peeps as possible plunge into it. We have an interest, right? But what I haven't done and won't do is to be ignorant on the matter. Another shoe is fixing to drop on the IAMNPF and I'm going to reveal it very soon.

At any rate, as I have consistently said, from my perspective of being stuck with this plan, any increased company contribution into my retirement ought to be put into my 401k. Don't want all my eggs into a basket with holes in it. That means keep the IAMNPF at $1.30 and negotiate a fixed 401k contribution with any increase in funds, like 3% going into a 401k as well. But not in any circumstance would I support the IAMNPF going up to $2 instead of a 3 prong because even if the company tosses in another .70 cents into the IAMNPF, I know that I'm not going to see the increased benefits that I have even today since the IAMNPF is guaranteed to be cut within 18 months but prolly sooner, then get cut again another 4 or 5 years since it has to stay green as there are no monies in the PBGC for multi employer plans. Even if that means my monthly benefit goes down to $30 buck a month, the Trustees won't have a choice but to keep it green by mulching my benefits and fertilizing the grass.

 

[Tim Nelson]

[

FWAAA,

I'm not an actuary but when you factor not everyone makes it 5 years with a company to get vested, not everyone retires at the same time, some maybe forget they have it, those monies contributed are invested and should earn a return over time, not everyone takes spousal benefit and some do, some people die too early, some take lump sums, etc. are a few things off the top of my head. These and other factors come into play when actuaries decide on the numbers.

If you look at my post, I talk about the greater good of getting all employees in pensions like in the past and supplementing that with a 401k(which the 401k was originally intended to do). I'm not just looking at AA, I'm looking at all Americans. What I'm having a hard time with is walking away and letting corporate America win. If we walk away from a pension and every other Union does the same and non-Union employees don't strive for it, where are we in 10, 15 or 20 years? I believe worse off as Americans and the middle class will continue to die.

Like I've said before, I don't have all the answers, but I know walking away isn't the answer.

https://www.actuary.org/pdf/pension/fundamentals_0704.pdf

P. Rez

Prez, but you aren't recognizing the laws and the predicament of defined pensions. People are walking away from pensions, with their hands firmly on their pocket because whether the company or union, the entities are now allowed to steal the pensions right back. Union pensions now got the go ahead to steal the checks from retirees, up to 50%, as long as they aren't 80 years old. The IAM isn't the exception, it has 5 pension plans. One of them, the IAM Motor City Pension Plan just filed to steal half the checks of current retirees and to eliminate most benefits of the plan for other participants. The Grand Lodge pension is doing fine for you and officers with a full funding. The IAMNPF is struggling and although not as awful as the other IAM Motor City pension, it will also have to make deep cuts. With that predicament and uncertanty, how could any fair person be for increasing company contributions into a IAMPF instead of opening up a 401k funding rate from the company? https://www.treasury.gov/services/P...on-of-Machinists-Motor-City-Pension-Fund.aspx

 

[WeAAsles]

[

Prez, but you aren't recognizing the laws and the predicament of defined pensions. People are walking away from pensions, with their hands firmly on their pocket because whether the company or union, the entities are now allowed to steal the pensions right back. Union pensions now got the go ahead to steal the checks from retirees, up to 50%, as long as they aren't 80 years old. The IAM isn't the exception, it has 5 pension plans. One of them, the IAM Motor City Pension Plan just filed to steal half the checks of current retirees and to eliminate most benefits of the plan for other participants. The Grand Lodge pension is doing fine for you and officers with a full funding. The IAMNPF is struggling and although not as awful as the other IAM Motor City pension, it will also have to make deep cuts. With that predicament and uncertanty, how could any fair person be for increasing company contributions into a IAMPF instead of opening up a 401k funding rate from the company? https://www.treasury.gov/services/P...on-of-Machinists-Motor-City-Pension-Fund.aspx

Is this Motor City Fund the fund myself or my coworkers have to concern ourselves with?

Is the IAM also trying to negotiate the IBT Central States Pension Fund too since we're on the subject?

 

[WeAAsles]

AANOTOK,

First, some assumptions. LAA will be given a choice. You and a buddy both have $200,000 in your 401k's at the end of 2017, both are working until December 31, 2024 and retiring. You both earn $80,000 each year until retirement, the company match is 5.5%, you both put 5.5% of earnings into your 401K each year($4400), 5.5% of $30.81 =$74.10 pension multiplier in B schedule and there are no increases to pension multiplier between now and when you both retire. You stick with 401k match and your buddy takes pension, 401k averages 7% returns each year, your buddy doesn't take spousal pension benefit.

At retirement, you would have $402,642 in your 401k and your buddy would have $361,898 plus pension multiplier equaling $518.70. You take out 4% per year and your buddy takes out 4% per year from your 401k's. You would get $1342.14 per month and your buddy would get $1725.03 per month.($1206.33 401k+$518.70 pension).

The pension would have to take a 74% hit for your buddy to make the same $1342.14 per month.

That is why giving up on the pension is so hard for me. I'm just trying to do what's best. Nobody is telling me what to say, if you notice, nobody else is talking about it. If I shut up and said nothing, my boss wouldn't say anything to me. Give me a crystal ball and I may adjust my thoughts, but until then, this is how I feel.

P. Rez

P. Rez you guys just keep on going trying to negotiate the option for "Me" if I want to join your Pension Plan or not.

Like I said, my instincts are telling me to jump in and damn any torpedos that others want to shoot.

 

[AANOTOK]

P. Rez you guys just keep on going trying to negotiate the option for "Me" if I want to join your Pension Plan or not.

Like I said, my instincts are telling me to jump in and damn any torpedos that others want to shoot.

AGAIN, most folks don't mind if there is an option, they just don't want to be forced. I am one who believes you WILL be given an option and not forced. So, there are no "torpedos" from my ship...that ship has sailed. I just wanted somewhat of a clarification on how and old geezer nearing retirement from LAA would benefit from the IAMPF. Pretty simple, eh?

 

[Tim Nelson]

Is this Motor City Fund the fund myself or my coworkers have to concern ourselves with?

Is the IAM also trying to negotiate the IBT Central States Pension Fund too since we're on the subject?

Just presenting information WeAAsles. As I've said from the beginning, I have no problem with TWU peeps jumping in this plan. What I showed in my comment was in fact that the IAM pension plans already have knifed retirees. Go to the IAMNPF page, there are 3 plans, plus the grand lodge plan which is different as well. The Motor City Plan isn't the IAMNPF but I've heard IAM bosses say that they would never knife a retiree. What I presented showed that I wasn't the one bull S'ing.

 

[CremaDiLimone]

I beg to differ sir. Most 401K co's are putting in 5-15% matching part or all dollar for dollar. It will all depend on what this asso. can get nego for the co's contribution part. With our 401 we get anywhere from 10-15k put into our just from the co. match, our part is the same as they match dollar for dollar. A 401 is much cheaper on the co. than the pensions so they can easily increase the matches accordingly. But if this asso. and company are going to try and run with both IAMPF, 401K, as well as still holding the frozen pension at AA it will be extremely hard to get the 401 co. match up near the top end. but I hope you guys really can.

- this company is not putting anything near a yearly 15% 401k match into anyone's portfolio.

- many are limited by what they can put into a 401k...either by the govt. or by current financial constraints. how much southwest mechanics can fund their own pension on a yearly basis is not similar to what an aa fsc can contribute, either from personal funds and/or company match.

- as far as aa feeling relieved that administrative costs are lower and they will jump to increase their match...well, that's not reality. the company balks at giving me 10 holidays.

i won't argue the trend. the trend is sad, what is more sad is those who argue corporate america's/1%er's positions. when aa froze our pension, they promptly started paying a dividend once out of bk. the money that was formerly used to fund the pension is now going to shareholders. the wealthiest 1% of americans own apprx. 45% of ALL the shares outstanding in the usa.

the 401k was a former obscure tax loophole for the wealthy. joe lunchbox now sings it's praises as he funds his own pension?? to me, a 401k is not the beat-all, end-all. the markets are fickle and i've seen events 4,000 miles away negatively impact markets here, regardless of usa macro & micro positive news.

Sorry, That dog won't hunt.

i'm not selling anything..let alone an iam pension that i have never been a member of.

Given how the pension laws have changed, I'll gladly take a 401K over a pension, but what we need to fight for is a much enhanced 401K.

that sums it all up. that's how i feel...but, i would not go overboard doing handstands and backflips funding my own pension.

 

[CremaDiLimone]

BAM!!!!!! Homerun just hit High into the upper bleachers.

well, it may have hooked foul.

still waiting to hear how many years, or centuries, it will take aa to fork over $15 billion into it's employees' 401k portfolios.

this is exactly what aa and other corporations want.

 

[WeAAsles]

Just presenting information WeAAsles. As I've said from the beginning, I have no problem with TWU peeps jumping in this plan. What I showed in my comment was in fact that the IAM pension plans already have knifed retirees. Go to the IAMNPF page, there are 3 plans, plus the grand lodge plan which is different as well. The Motor City Plan isn't the IAMNPF but I've heard IAM bosses say that they would never knife a retiree. What I presented showed that I wasn't the one bull S'ing.

Ok. The IAMNPF is not some Motor City IAM plan.

That's all I wanted to know.

 

[WeAAsles]

AGAIN, most folks don't mind if there is an option, they just don't want to be forced. I am one who believes you WILL be given an option and not forced. So, there are no "torpedos" from my ship...that ship has sailed. I just wanted somewhat of a clarification on how and old geezer nearing retirement from LAA would benefit from the IAMPF. Pretty simple, eh?

Copy that.

 

[WeAAsles]

Saved 12 stations and secured a bigger wage, so even though ta2 was lacking, it was better than ta1 so it is always rewarding to negotiate more out of management and to help a brother out.

You've never been a Negotiator. And I personally find your financial awareness skills frightening to be completely honest.

 

[Jester]

AGAIN, most folks don't mind if there is an option, they just don't want to be forced. I am one who believes you WILL be given an option and not forced. So, there are no "torpedos" from my ship...that ship has sailed. I just wanted somewhat of a clarification on how and old geezer nearing retirement from LAA would benefit from the IAMPF. Pretty simple, eh?

You can do the math, so let's keep it simple?

You are one year from retirement and part of the IAMPF for that one year. The current benefit is $55(?) per month for that one year of service. $660 annual benefit for life. The question now becomes as to how much would the company need to contribute to your 401K for that one remaining year of employment to equal the monthly benefit of $55? (Notice I deliberately leave out your contribution share into the 401K as you are able to invest that equal amount into an IRA without the employer contribution, as well as you are not contributing to the pension as it is only done by the employer.)

General rule is 4% burn rate on the nest egg annually as not to outlive one's retirement. The inverse of 4% would be a 25x multiplier (1/.04) times $660 equal to $16,500. So the question becomes, could the Company contribution $16,500 to your 401K in one year? Even if the Company matched 8% to equal $16,500, your last year's income would need to be $206,250 ($206,250 X 8% = $16,500). We are talking captain money, and I don't see many of them in this thread.

My analysis should not be confused as an endorsement of the IAMPF, in particular, those with more than a decade to retirement. However, in the very short term, it would make sense, and frankly, the numbers are so favorable to the retiree, I would be surprised if the pension would give the option to make it a choice between the IAMPF and a 401K. It appears to be an obvious decision for those close to retirement would accept the pension and it would be a very expensive result against the IAMPF's long-term liabilities.

 

[Tim Nelson]

You've never been a Negotiator. And I personally find your financial awareness skills frightening to be completely honest.

Actually my various campaigns have. No sense in repeating all my honors. Ill tell you another little secret. The company isnt holding up the talks. Several months ago, negotiations were going good enuf for most peeps in the know to believe a ta could be had in early spring. But along the way, i won another federal case which wiped out the fake election. That action preserved our lus health care and other concessions another year as Sito couldnt cough up anything without great pain and political beatings next February.

So, the stall is in until he can buy the time to continue the lus health care enrollment past the february election. That means a deal this fall. Now, im not a prophet and i really hate being right most of the time but save this comment cuz lus will enroll 1 more time into lus healthcare. Still some collateral damage for sito rolling us into laa health care cost but his hedge is that our lus wont feel that 2018 stinger until 2019. As far as the pension, we will b hosed about that and im not sure he can drag out the pension cuts past the next 6 months but 100% within 18. If they wait, then the cuts have to come harder.

 

[WeAAsles]

Actually my various campaigns have. No sense in repeating all my honors. Ill tell you another little secret. The company isnt holding up the talks. Several months ago, negotiations were going good enuf for most peeps in the know to believe a ta could be had in early spring. But along the way, i won another federal case which wiped out the fake election. That action preserved our lus health care and other concessions another year as Sito couldnt cough up anything without great pain and political beatings next February.

So, the stall is in until he can buy the time to continue the lus health care enrollment past the february election. That means a deal this fall. Now, im not a prophet and i really hate being right most of the time but save this comment cuz lus will enroll 1 more time into lus healthcare. Still some collateral damage for sito rolling us into laa health care cost but his hedge is that our lus wont feel that 2018 stinger until 2019. As far as the pension, we will b hosed about that and im not sure he can drag out the pension cuts past the next 6 months but 100% within 18. If they wait, then the cuts have to come harder.

Ah now I understand and get it. Why you stated a few months ago that you wouldn't be retiring till you reached 70 years old. You've been saving all of your excess capital to build a monument to yourself.

Just don't forget to leave behind a cleaning fund to have the pigeon poop removed from time to time.

How your brain comes up with all this lunacy is a fascinating study.

https://www.mentalhelp.net/articles/mental-health-hotline/