TWU-IAM Finally Getting Ready for JCBA Negotiations

[CMH_GSE]

Heres one for you. Get it in writing from Lombardo and Buffy that it will not happen and I will shut the fuk up!

I mostly agree here, put it in writing that our pensions are untouchable, period.

 

[NYer]

I mostly agree here, put it in writing that our pensions are untouchable, period.

 
So I guess you have it writing that it will happen.
 
You guys invent a scenario and the others have to prove you wrong? Here's an idea, what about you prove that your scenario is true. Show us in the PBGC where they allow such things. Show us where the IAM has mentioned they want an underfunded pension plan to add to their own plan.
 
It doesn't even make sense.
 
The IAM Plan is funded better than the AA plans. The only thing the IAM does by taking over the AA plan is to jeopardize their own.
 
....And the piece of this whole nonsense that makes even less sense is how a group that is afraid the IAM might "take over" the AA pension is also advocating to have a vote between all the unions by which if the IAM wins they control EVERYTHING. You guys are just ridiculous.

 

[xUT]

 
So I guess you have it writing that it will happen.
 
You guys invent a scenario and the others have to prove you wrong? Here's an idea, what about you prove that your scenario is true. Show us in the PBGC where they allow such things. Show us where the IAM has mentioned they want an underfunded pension plan to add to their own plan.
 
It doesn't even make sense.
 
The IAM Plan is funded better than the AA plans. The only thing the IAM does by taking over the AA plan is to jeopardize their own.
 
....And the piece of this whole nonsense that makes even less sense is how a group that is afraid the IAM might "take over" the AA pension is also advocating to have a vote between all the unions by which if the IAM wins they control EVERYTHING. You guys are just ridiculous.

Considering the association mentioned the iam pension in one of their letters, it does not seem unreasonable that this will happen.

 

[scorpion 2]

 
So I guess you have it writing that it will happen.
 
You guys invent a scenario and the others have to prove you wrong? Here's an idea, what about you prove that your scenario is true. Show us in the PBGC where they allow such things. Show us where the IAM has mentioned they want an underfunded pension plan to add to their own plan.
 
It doesn't even make sense.
 
The IAM Plan is funded better than the AA plans. The only thing the IAM does by taking over the AA plan is to jeopardize their own.
 
....And the piece of this whole nonsense that makes even less sense is how a group that is afraid the IAM might "take over" the AA pension is also advocating to have a vote between all the unions by which if the IAM wins they control EVERYTHING. You guys are just ridiculous.

How over funded would the iam plan be if it were governed by our AA guidelines?  The twu and iam were the ones who got the ball rolling on the pension scenarios by leaving everything on the table with their pension letter.  If they had stated that our trust would be left alone we wouldnt be having this dialogue right now.
 
The PBGC would have a much lower liability if our plan were to move from a single employer to a multi-employer plan like the iamnpf.  
 
So which is it? The PBGC will not allow it but if the iam were to be voted in you say they would control everything.   What happened to the PBGC?   

 

[CMH_GSE]

So I guess you have it writing that it will happen.
 
You guys invent a scenario and the others have to prove you wrong? Here's an idea, what about you prove that your scenario is true. Show us in the PBGC where they allow such things. Show us where the IAM has mentioned they want an underfunded pension plan to add to their own plan.
 
It doesn't even make sense.
 
The IAM Plan is funded better than the AA plans. The only thing the IAM does by taking over the AA plan is to jeopardize their own.
 
....And the piece of this whole nonsense that makes even less sense is how a group that is afraid the IAM might "take over" the AA pension is also advocating to have a vote between all the unions by which if the IAM wins they control EVERYTHING. You guys are just ridiculous.

Couple of things in no particular order:

Yes, we advocate for a vote , because that's the way it should be.
Could the IAM win a vote, I guess, theoretically, would they, of course not, that's why they are trying to ride in with the association, or else why bother, go for the whole enchilada themselves.

Do we have it writing that the pensions will be raided by the IAM? No, but you act as though the international has no idea that this is a problem with the membership.
Make no mistake, the International is well aware of the pension issue being a problem as well as several other things.

The silence from the international , so far, is deafening on all the things that are red flags to the membership.
Might be because the , in the end, it will be the TWU and not the ass.
That would make a number of issues go away.

If it becomes the ass, there's going to be problems that will need to be dealt with, and if it's not in writing, we get nervous.

 

[NYer]

Considering the association mentioned the iam pension in one of their letters, it does not seem unreasonable that this will happen.

 
What it mentioned was that the TWU would support the continued coverage of the IAM Pension for their members and if there was no interest in the company expanding on the coverage then the TWU then we'd be OK with them keeping it.
 

[SIZE=9pt]"NOW THEREFORE, TWU and lAM agree to propose a defined benefit pension with the IAMNPF in negotiations with the New American Airlines for single, combined Collective Bargaining Agreements covering Mechanic and Related, Fleet Service and Stores employees in order to provide a defined benefit pension for those employees at American Airlines whose pensions were frozen in American's bankruptcy, and to continue the participation of those employees at US Airways who currently have defined benefit pensions in the IAMNPF.[/SIZE]"
[SIZE=9pt] [/SIZE]
[SIZE=9pt]"TWU and lAM further agree to give priority to reaching agreement in negotiations with the New American Airlines on a defined benefit pension with the IAMNPF for Mechanic and Related, Fleet Service and Stores employees[/SIZE][SIZE=9pt].[/SIZE]"
[SIZE=9pt] [/SIZE]
[SIZE=9pt]"TWU and lAM further agree that, in the event that negotiations with the Carrier to cover the entire crafts or classes of Mechanic and Related, Fleet Service and Stores at the New American Airlines do not [/SIZE][SIZE=9pt]result in agreement, TWU will support continued participation in the IAMNPF of those of the Carrier's[/SIZE][SIZE=9pt] [/SIZE][SIZE=9pt]employees who are already participants in the IAMNPF.[/SIZE][SIZE=9pt]"[/SIZE]
[SIZE=9pt] [/SIZE]
[SIZE=9pt]TWU and IAM further agree that TWU will propose a defined benefit plan with the IAMNPF in[/SIZE][SIZE=9pt] [/SIZE][SIZE=9pt]negotiations with the New American Airlines for Collective Bargaining Agreements covering the Other[/SIZE][SIZE=9pt] [/SIZE][SIZE=9pt]TWU-represented Crafts or Classes, and that the IAM will facilitate the participation of these in the[/SIZE][SIZE=9pt] [/SIZE][SIZE=9pt]IAMNPF.[/SIZE]"

 

[NYer]

How over funded would the iam plan be if it were governed by our AA guidelines?  The twu and iam were the ones who got the ball rolling on the pension scenarios by leaving everything on the table with their pension letter.  If they had stated that our trust would be left alone we wouldnt be having this dialogue right now.
 
The PBGC would have a much lower liability if our plan were to move from a single employer to a multi-employer plan like the iamnpf.  
 
So which is it? The PBGC will not allow it but if the iam were to be voted in you say they would control everything.   What happened to the PBGC?   

 
But that letter doesn't mention they take over of our plan. That doesn't even make sense since it would make the IAM liable for any underfunding with the frozen plans.
 
You can't change a plan from a single employer to a multi-employer after the fact. The plan was frozen, it is already what it is. All this "creative" thinking of doomsday does not allow those types of changes to be made.
 
The comment about the IAM taking over is to show how absurd it is to make the argument that this Association is a bad idea because the IAM wants our pension and to then argue that a vote is necessary which would result in the possiblity of the IAM taking over as the representative union. The pension are vested and unless the PBGC takes them over it can't be switched from a single employer to a multi-employer.

 

[WeAAsles]

One more time with this.
 
[SIZE=9pt]"NOW THEREFORE, TWU and lAM agree to [/SIZE]"propose"[SIZE=9pt] a defined benefit pension with the IAMNPF in negotiations with the New American Airlines for single, combined Collective Bargaining Agreements covering Mechanic and Related, Fleet Service and Stores employees in order to [/SIZE]"provide"[SIZE=9pt] a defined benefit pension for those employees at American Airlines whose pensions were frozen in American's bankruptcy, and to continue the participation of those employees at US Airways who currently have defined benefit pensions in the IAMNPF.[/SIZE]"
[SIZE=9pt] [/SIZE]
[SIZE=9pt]"TWU and lAM further agree to give priority to reaching agreement in negotiations with the New American Airlines on a defined benefit pension with the IAMNPF for Mechanic and Related, Fleet Service and Stores employees[/SIZE][SIZE=9pt].[/SIZE]"
[SIZE=9pt] [/SIZE]
[SIZE=9pt]"TWU and lAM further agree that, in the event that negotiations with the Carrier to cover the entire crafts or classes of Mechanic and Related, Fleet Service and Stores at the New American Airlines [/SIZE]"do not result in agreement"[SIZE=9pt], TWU will support continued participation in the IAMNPF of those of the Carrier's[/SIZE][SIZE=9pt] [/SIZE][SIZE=9pt]employees who are already participants in the IAMNPF.[/SIZE][SIZE=9pt]"[/SIZE]
[SIZE=9pt] [/SIZE]
[SIZE=9pt]TWU and IAM further agree that TWU will [/SIZE]"propose"[SIZE=9pt] a defined benefit plan with the IAMNPF in[/SIZE][SIZE=9pt] [/SIZE][SIZE=9pt]negotiations with the New American Airlines for Collective Bargaining Agreements covering the Other[/SIZE][SIZE=9pt] [/SIZE][SIZE=9pt]TWU-represented Crafts or Classes, and that the IAM will facilitate the participation of these in the[/SIZE][SIZE=9pt] [/SIZE][SIZE=9pt]IAMNPF.[/SIZE]"

Now to put up a different link.

For over five years the Machinists have been trying to influence their current Members into believing that the CARP must be "frozen" and the IAM National Pension Plan is the right and only answer for the combined workgroup. Twice Continental Flight Attendants have rejected this notion, and the fact is there is no reason the CARP should not survive this merger. United has testified before Congress the viability of the Plan, and no other work group at Continental who belongs to this Plan is even talking about it, let alone trying to convince it's Members about the need to "freeze it".

http://unitedafa.org/news/details.aspx?id=6199

So yes of course the reality is that the IAM would like us to become participants in the IAMNPF. The IAM spoke nothing about taking on the liabilities of the CARP plan after the merger of Co and UAL. They did pressure to have it "frozen" though and that was rejected. To even consider us though to become NEW participants in the plan it has to be agreed to by three parties. Our TWU Negotiators, the Company and then ultimately the Membership.

Could I see the "possibility" of there being an "option" between choosing to have either a 401k match or participation in the IAMPF? Sure, maybe? But all the current participants in the IAMPF are in no way shape or form going to ask for or accept the liabilities of our underfunded pension being thrown into the mix. If it was AA would still be required to make up the shortfall and in the meantime just to get it back to green zone status, cuts to the payouts would have to be made. 

I don't see even and ounce of that being possible, plausible or reasonable. Again it does make a good scary bedtime story though.

 

[NYer]

Couple of things in no particular order:

Yes, we advocate for a vote , because that's the way it should be.
Could the IAM win a vote, I guess, theoretically, would they, of course not, that's why they are trying to ride in with the association, or else why bother, go for the whole enchilada themselves.

Do we have it writing that the pensions will be raided by the IAM? No, but you act as though the international has no idea that this is a problem with the membership.
Make no mistake, the International is well aware of the pension issue being a problem as well as several other things.

The silence from the international , so far, is deafening on all the things that are red flags to the membership.
Might be because the , in the end, it will be the TWU and not the ass.
That would make a number of issues go away.

If it becomes the ass, there's going to be problems that will need to be dealt with, and if it's not in writing, we get nervous.

 
There is a the dangerous play, assuming the TWU would win a vote. These pages  have been filled for years with anti-TWU sentiment, ridicule, accusations of incompetence and suddenly many of those people believe a vote FOR the TWU is a shoe-in. Those feelings might come because we have larger numbers but even by reading these pages, the same people that scream for a vote are also looking for a change away from the TWU. No, a win is not a certainty.
 
You guys get nervous even when it is in writing. Everyone is against the mechanics, the airlines, the NMB, the FAA, the courts, reporters, analysts, financial experts, lawyers, judges. most elected representatives, the list is endless.

 

[MetalMover]

 
 
You guys get nervous even when it is in writing. Everyone is against the mechanics, the airlines, the NMB, the FAA, the courts, reporters, analysts, financial experts, lawyers, judges. most elected representatives, the list is endless.

You would understand IF you were a mechanic who did not fare so well under the TWU. You see it through the eyes of fleet service who really fared better than the rest of us under the TWU.
Wait until JCBA and you realize you aren't being offered what your counterparts at DL are earning what the FA's and Pilots were offered.

 

[FWAAA]

What you don understand your pension isn't fully funded and its future obligations aren't funded yet either.

Derek Kerr might disagree with you, as he told everyone listening to the quarterly conference call that the AA pension plans were funded "over 100%" as of 12/31/14:
 

We also contributed $781 million to our defined pension plans. And based on airline funding rules, we are over 100% funded, which is better than our network peers. Based on current assumptions, we are forecasting no recorded contributions until 2019.

http://seekingalpha.com/article/2855206-american-airlines-aal-ceo-doug-parker-on-q4-2014-results-earnings-call-transcript?part=single
 

The IAMNPF is funded to 105% and AA has already had pension relief from the reform act that was passed.
 
Your frozen pension isnt 100% funded nor has enough money to generate its liabilities without AA funding it, it was frozen for a reason, if it was fully funded and could generate enough money to pay the future liabilities it would have never been frozen.
 
I believe AA paid $781 million into last year.

Correct, and Kerr said that under current rules, it is funded "over 100%" and that AA won't need to make additional contributions until 2019, as quoted above. 
 

The IAM Plan is funded better than the AA plans. The only thing the IAM does by taking over the AA plan is to jeopardize their own.
 
....And the piece of this whole nonsense that makes even less sense is how a group that is afraid the IAM might "take over" the AA pension is also advocating to have a vote between all the unions by which if the IAM wins they control EVERYTHING. You guys are just ridiculous.

Funny thing about that - the IAM does not have the ability to shovel more money in its plans the way AA does. If the markets tank, lowering the effective funding of AA's plans, then Parker and Kirby write another check to the frozen plans. What happens if the markets tank and the IAM plans lose value? Who writes a check to restore funding in the IAM plans?

 

[scorpion 2]

But that letter doesn't mention they take over of our plan. That doesn't even make sense since it would make the IAM liable for any underfunding with the frozen plans.
 
You can't change a plan from a single employer to a multi-employer after the fact. The plan was frozen, it is already what it is. All this "creative" thinking of doomsday does not allow those types of changes to be made.
 
The comment about the IAM taking over is to show how absurd it is to make the argument that this Association is a bad idea because the IAM wants our pension and to then argue that a vote is necessary which would result in the possiblity of the IAM taking over as the representative union. The pension are vested and unless the PBGC takes them over it can't be switched from a single employer to a multi-employer.

If it cant be switched from a single employer to a multi employer plan as you claim then it should be real simple to get a statement from the international.

The twu retirement guy I spoke with said if the 2 unions and the company were in agreement and the membership voted for it that it could happen. This isnt creative thinking as some suggest only good questions that were answered by the twu's own retirement guy.

As far as under funded liabilities being taken over by the iamnpf maybe this will put it in prospective.
How under funded would social security be if they raised the retirement age 5 years across the board. Then to add insult to injury you had to get permission from them to go to work even after full retirement age. If you didnt your pension could get reduced.

With changes like that staring us in the face our under funded trust just became a windfall to the iamnpf not a underfunded liability. Ya im concerned.

 

[NYer]

You would understand IF you were a mechanic who did not fare so well under the TWU. You see it through the eyes of fleet service who really fared better than the rest of us under the TWU.
Wait until JCBA and you realize you aren't being offered what your counterparts at DL are earning what the FA's and Pilots were offered.

 
I guess the rhetoric about the other title groups dragging down maintenance hasn't really panned out.
 
It used to be the other title groups dragging down wages, then it was the TWU ATD, the TWU International, then Little, Gless, Videtich, Luis, Woodward, Zimmerman, Gilboy. It was also the lawyers, Rosen, Richards and Levine. Wait, can't forget to blame the financial people like Tom Roth, Donnelly and the Gordian Group. We have to include the NMB and their mediator Jack Kane, the newspapers, the analysts...of course we also need to mention Crandall, Carty, Arpey, Horton and now Parker. All the judges and courts that have thrown out all the varied lawsuits. Give me a minute...there's more.....Oh yes, most of the Fleet Presidents, FSC themselves for voting those contracts in, the Teamsters, the IAM, the scabs from Northwest, the APA, the APFA...wait there's more....stand by....oh..oh...The bankruptcy court and Judge Sean Lane.....

 

[NYer]

If it cant be switched from a single employer to a multi employer plan as you claim then it should be real simple to get a statement from the international.

The twu retirement guy I spoke with said if the 2 unions and the company were in agreement and the membership voted for it that it could happen. This isnt creative thinking as some suggest only good questions that were answered by the twu's own retirement guy.

As far as under funded liabilities being taken over by the iamnpf maybe this will put it in prospective.
How under funded would social security be if they raised the retirement age 5 years across the board. Then to add insult to injury you had to get permission from them to go to work even after full retirement age. If you didnt your pension could get reduced.

With changes like that staring us in the face our under funded trust just became a windfall to the iamnpf not a underfunded liability. Ya im concerned.

 
The TWU doesn't currently have a "retirement guy." Do you have a name?
 
Your pension is vested. Even when the multi-employer plans have made modifications they have been for future accruals and not the vested portions already earned.
 
The IAMPF in currently funded to government standards which keep them in the green. If they take on liabilities, like the AA Plan, they would endanger themselves of going into a yellow or red status which makes absolutely no sense to do.
 
If someone bought a house and paid it off, then wouldn't take on the mortgage from a house that is upside down on their mortgage. It is ridiculous.
 
If you guys want to create anxiety because you're against the Association, then you have to do much better than this because this is more than a reach.

 

[NYer]

Derek Kerr might disagree with you, as he told everyone listening to the quarterly conference call that the AA pension plans were funded "over 100%" as of 12/31/14:
 

http://seekingalpha.com/article/2855206-american-airlines-aal-ceo-doug-parker-on-q4-2014-results-earnings-call-transcript?part=single
 


Correct, and Kerr said that under current rules, it is funded "over 100%" and that AA won't need to make additional contributions until 2019, as quoted above. 
 

Funny thing about that - the IAM does not have the ability to shovel more money in its plans the way AA does. If the markets tank, lowering the effective funding of AA's plans, then Parker and Kirby write another check to the frozen plans. What happens if the markets tank and the IAM plans lose value? Who writes a check to restore funding in the IAM plans?

 
Probably no one writes a check. If the multi-employer plan falls below Federally mandated funding levels they would have to follow set guidelines to make those plans solvent.
 
As it stands, AA doesn't have to put a dime into their plan until around 2019.