No to the Alliance!

[swamt]

  Thats not a given. It also could be a rally cry to get more cards because there are not enough. It works a multitude of ways .....

   Your actually right, it very well could be a cry for more cards.  If there are not enough cards then the membership will not be voting on this association as promised by the TWU/IAM.  When all this does happen (IF) then I would predict the membership going nuts.  Instead of just sitting back and waiting for a vote because the unions said there will be a vote, why not make it in stone that you guys will get a vote and get the cards needed to trigger a vote?  What would anyone be scared of by having a vote?  Like the NMB has stated in writing, if there is no intervenor union showing interest, then the NMB will certify this association.  How does anyone get that will be a vote from this statement by the NMB.  I'm telling you the TWU and the IAM (along with others) are just trying to mislead the membership into not signing cards so that this association will get certified in as the NMB has stated. Why doesn't someone put it in writing to the TWU and IAM leadership and see what kind of response you get?  The TWU/IAM are just praying absolutely praying that there will not be enough cards collected so that this association gets brought in without a vote and no membership say so what so ever, it will be forced upon you guys if you do not get enough cards.  I will tell you all this, if there are not enough cards collected to get AMFA on the ballot I don't want hear the whining about the failure as most all of us know this will be the last and final chance (IMO) to get it done, no better chance than now, unless this association completely screws up on this contract coming (which I do see happening).  Sorry for the harsh words but I am positive most you on here know how to read and take it.  Now, get those cards in guys 10 days to collect and turn them in.  I would try to turn them in on the 14th and not take any chances, no telling what kind of interference you guys may have to face upon turning in the cards, good luck to all...
 

I am not ant-UNION. I do think UNIONS need to make some fundamental changes.
 
The other choice is they keep doing business as usual and fade into obscurity. 
 
It is pretty obvious what they are doing is NOT working. At least it is NOT working for the membership.

Well said sir.
 

My personal opinion is that Unions shouldn't fight each other. Not saying the association is the right solution but at least they aren't fighting with each other.

Not yet. Just wait until they start switching who is in control what every 2 years, and see the reworkings of what the other group did while they were in charge.  You guys will be going back and forth forever.  And BTW, there already has been in-fighting between the two unions, where have you been.  There have been letters written and the back and forth already, so to say this association is not fighting with each-other is false, and will only get worse in the long run and do nothing but un-doable damage to the membership as a whole...

 

[saywhat]

Being in the twu will do that to you. There are a few people on here that hate UNIONS after being in the twu. I personally regard working at AA fleet as working non union. However as disgusting as the twu is I am still a union man. Not all unions are like the twu.

That sucks to hear but I agree that being in a Union is better then being an at will employee.

 

[scorpion 2]

Q: Does American Airlines want to merge the AA frozen pension plan into the IAM National Pension Fund (IAMNPF)?
 
A: Discussions about merging AA’s frozen pension plan into the IAMNPF have not occurred.

 
The IAM has never merged an airline industry pension plan into the IAMNPF.
In fact, when Northwest Airlines, United Airlines and US Airways either froze or terminated their employer-sponsored, defined-benefit pension plans, the IAM did not merge these frozen and terminated plans into the IAMNPF. They remained administered by either the company or the PBGC, resulting in IAM members receiving two pension checks in retirement – one from the IAMNPF and one from their previous employer-sponsored plan.

http://www.usaamerger.com/

Since discussions have not occurred means what?  Why would those discussions take place before negotiations began and why would AA discuss anything at this point with the iam or the fund managers of the iamnpf?  Never merged an airline pension is a little bit of a hair splitting comment. They probably never had an airline pension that was 100% funded and more like 150% funded if the pension guidelines were swapped to match the pathetic iamnpf guidelines. Two checks, one for $400 bucks and the other for $250?
That post provides absolutely no substance or legal standing to the twu members to alleviate any concern about their frozen pension trust. If anything it proves they are in a very precarious and vulnerable situation because of all the dance around wormy factoids with no direct statements.
How about one from the iam or the iamnpf that states UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCE WILL YOUR AA PENSION TRUST BE TRANSFERRED TO THE IAMNPF. Get on the phone with your international appointees and get the ball rolling on this. Its not like they haven't been asked but maybe you can be the MAN to get it done.         

 

[767 mechanic]

Q: Does American Airlines want to merge the AA frozen pension plan into the IAM National Pension Fund (IAMNPF)?
 
A: Discussions about merging AA’s frozen pension plan into the IAMNPF have not occurred.

 
The IAM has never merged an airline industry pension plan into the IAMNPF.
In fact, when Northwest Airlines, United Airlines and US Airways either froze or terminated their employer-sponsored, defined-benefit pension plans, the IAM did not merge these frozen and terminated plans into the IAMNPF. They remained administered by either the company or the PBGC, resulting in IAM members receiving two pension checks in retirement – one from the IAMNPF and one from their previous employer-sponsored plan.

http://www.usaamerger.com/

The fact that it has never happened does not mean that they have not tried. You have carefully left something out. When United filed bankruptcy the iam tried to put fleets pension fund in the iam's slush fund,but were stopped by the PBGC. The PBGC is not here to stop them and the iam is in control of negotiations. Even if the twu and the iam vote down party lines 6-6 the iam is in control of negotiations and have the tiebreaker vote. So everyone can see how this is going to go.

 

[WorldTraveler]

The chances that an underfunded single airline pension will be merged into a multi-employer pension are slim to none.

There is a far greater chance for the PBGC to recover assets from a company than a union.

The PBGC is very unlikely to ever allow companies to transfer their pension liabilities to a union.

 

[WeAAsles]

The fact that it has never happened does not mean that they have not tried. You have carefully left something out. When United filed bankruptcy the iam tried to put fleets pension fund in the iam's slush fund,but were stopped by the PBGC. The PBGC is not here to stop them and the iam is in control of negotiations. Even if the twu and the iam vote down party lines 6-6 the iam is in control of negotiations and have the tiebreaker vote. So everyone can see how this is going to go.

I left nothing out. I merely posted the information that was presented. After doing some research you are correct by reading this link I found. The attempt was made and turned down by the PBGC who was asked to foot the bill for the underfunding.
 
The PBGC should have the authority and willingness to implement creative labor-management solutions to preserve pension benefits. At United Airlines, the IAM and United negotiated a proposal that would have included restoration funding by the PBGC and transferring United’s pension liabilities to the IAM National Pension Plan. It would have left United in substantially the same position as it is today, following termination, and would have saved the PBGC $500 million dollars while preserving pension benefits for our members. Unfortunately, the PBGC rejected the deal.

http://www.finance.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/rrtest060705.pdf

Now if you read the letter in full you'll see that the IAM had proposed to UAL in 2000 that they FREEZE the plan and transfer their members into the IAMPF going forward.

In 2005 from reading the letter rather than the pensions being thrown on the PBGC now that UAL had underfunded them, the IAM DID propose to take over the entirety of the pension plans. If you look at the financials of the PBGC it is almost catastrophically underfunded. There is a very strong future likelihood that absent a taxpayer bailout, substantial raising of the insurance premiums charged to companies or "Reduction In Payouts" the PBGC will likely one day become insolvent. Can you guess which one will likely take place one day?

So the way I look at it the IAM sought to preserve as much as they could of that Pension and the liabilities since it was going to be thrown into a riskier proposition anyway and take on that fund by putting it into the IAMPF.

Ours is currently frozen and is no longer at risk of being thrown on the PBGC. Plus the company made accelerated payments to the tune of an extra $700 Million dollars above obligations for 2014. Trying to compare Apples and Oranges against the two very different scenarios doesn't quite stack up.  

 
 

 

[scorpion 2]

 

I left nothing out. I merely posted the information that was presented. After doing some research you are correct by reading this link I found. The attempt was made and turned down by the PBGC who was asked to foot the bill for the underfunding.
 
The PBGC should have the authority and willingness to implement creative labor-management solutions to preserve pension benefits. At United Airlines, the IAM and United negotiated a proposal that would have included restoration funding by the PBGC and transferring United’s pension liabilities to the IAM National Pension Plan. It would have left United in substantially the same position as it is today, following termination, and would have saved the PBGC $500 million dollars while preserving pension benefits for our members. Unfortunately, the PBGC rejected the deal.

http://www.finance.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/rrtest060705.pdf

Now if you read the letter in full you'll see that the IAM had proposed to UAL in 2000 that they FREEZE the plan and transfer their members into the IAMPF going forward.

In 2005 from reading the letter rather than the pensions being thrown on the PBGC now that UAL had underfunded them, the IAM DID propose to take over the entirety of the pension plans. If you look at the financials of the PBGC it is almost catastrophically underfunded. There is a very strong future likelihood that absent a taxpayer bailout, substantial raising of the insurance premiums charged to companies or "Reduction In Payouts" the PBGC will likely one day become insolvent. Can you guess which one will likely take place one day?

So the way I look at it the IAM sought to preserve as much as they could of that Pension and the liabilities since it was going to be thrown into a riskier proposition anyway and take on that fund by putting it into the IAMPF.

Ours is currently frozen and is no longer at risk of being thrown on the PBGC. Plus the company made accelerated payments to the tune of an extra $700 Million dollars above obligations for 2014. Trying to compare Apples and Oranges against the two very different scenarios doesn't quite stack up.  

 
 
 

That sounds like a desperate move to obtain cash to me. Would those members receive a reduced payout to to match the deficit or would money (paid in by other members) be siphoned off to make up the difference? 
That post should be the poster child of why we should sign a card, thanks. 
If they will take on an underfunded plan (which you and 700 claim they wouldn't do) they will definitely come after ours!  Why would you post something like that? Now your saying that the reason they tried to get the UAL plan was to save it from the PBGC but since ours is flush with cash they are not interested. Make up your mind.
I hope and pray that the membership is reading this. 

 

[chellow]

Is there any question that TWU and IAM agree that the TWU will propose a defined benefit plan with the IAMNPF in negotiations with the New American Airlines for collective Bargaining Agreements covering the other TWU-represented Craft or Classes, and that the IAM will facilitate the participation of these in the IAMNPF.
 
Because by all the rhetoric from the TWU and IAM that agreement is not true.

 

[2ndGENAMT]

The chances that an underfunded single airline pension will be merged into a multi-employer pension are slim to none.There is a far greater chance for the PBGC to recover assets from a company than a union.The PBGC is very unlikely to ever allow companies to transfer their pension liabilities to a union.

Underfunded?
My Annual Funding Notice that came in the mail last week says its 100.73% funded.

 

[1AA]

Did any of you guys get the TWU letter or flyer about the pensions? It said it will not discuss the company frozen pension. I got it from local 591 but the letter was not signed by anybody. The letter did not even state who wrote it and who it was directed too. More assumptions and scare tactics to stop us from signing AMFA cards.

 

[AANOTOK]

Did any of you guys get the TWU letter or flyer about the pensions? It said it will not discuss the company frozen pension. I got it from local 591 but the letter was not signed by anybody. The letter did not even state who wrote it and who it was directed too. More assumptions and scare tactics to stop us from signing AMFA cards.

http://www.local591.com/docs/Pension%20Flyer.pdf

 

[1AA]

http://www.local591.com/docs/Pension%20Flyer.pdf

That's the one. I did not take notice that it was not signed or who wrote it until I got an email being sent around pointing it out. The TWU International was asked to put something in writing. This flyer just proves that they won't put their name on the bottom line when it comes to the fate of our pensions. That flyer should piss more guys off. The fence sitters should be convinced to sign a card by now.

 

[Bob Owens]

My personal opinion is that Unions shouldn't fight each other. Not saying the association is the right solution but at least they aren't fighting with each other.

And they need to remember that they work for the membership and should not treat them like a commodity. Thats exactly what this Association does, some here try and justify it by saying it takes the wishes of the IAM guys in consideration, however that simply is contradicted by the fact that the Association decided who would be where, mechanics in NY werent given a choice to stay in the IASM, they are going to the TWU whether they like it or not, TWU reporesented mechanics in Boston and DCA are being forced into the IAM, so all their pitiful justoifications simply fall flat. This decision wasnt about maintaining labor peace, we dont see the ALPA and APA at war, we dont see the APFA and AFA at war, those Unions realized they work for the members and did what was best for the members, Little and Buffy did what was good for Little and Buffy. If two guys showed up at your door and said they didnt want to fight over your daughter and decided to share her I imagine, hope, you would take a bat to both of them, I would.

 

[chilokie1]

That's the one. I did not take notice that it was not signed or who wrote it until I got an email being sent around pointing it out. The TWU International was asked to put something in writing. This flyer just proves that they won't put their name on the bottom line when it comes to the fate of our pensions. That flyer should piss more guys off. The fence sitters should be convinced to sign a card by now.

I agree 100% , I wonder if that bus that the TWU threw Danker under was 
that big heavy RV bus that comes around at flex benefit sign up? OUCH!!!

 

[Bob Owens]

The chances that an underfunded single airline pension will be merged into a multi-employer pension are slim to none.There is a far greater chance for the PBGC to recover assets from a company than a union.The PBGC is very unlikely to ever allow companies to transfer their pension liabilities to a union.

You dont know what you are talking about. First off the PBGC has nothing to do with this as our plan is frozen. The AA plan where we can retire at 60 without penalty and at 55 with a 15% penalty is obviously a more expensive plan than the IAMNPF where the retirement age is 65 with a 4.5% penalty per year prior to 65. Its likely that if transfered, under the IAM terms the funds in the AA plan there would be no shortfall, instead a surpluss.