And inclusion into the IAMPF could affect the negotiations progress, so it is part of this topic as well.1AA said:Guys there is a thread specific to the iampf lawsuit.
We will never agree on this.WeAAsles said:I agree with your comment on the fund managers........ but.Resolution: The lawsuit is seeking a court order requiring the defendants to restore any losses suffered by the fund due to the alleged violations and requiring the fund to implement reforms to prevent future ERISA violations.
http://www.dol.gov/newsroom/releases/20160201-1
And on that one if we were being "forced" into the plan, you'd have to get in line behind me against that.Traymark said:We will never agree on this.
To me, the fund is a very poor choice for retirement money.
It's run by people that knew what they were doing was wrong, they did it anyway.
And that's beside the fact that I view a 401k a much better choice , just based on the control it gives each investor.
Reforms won't change the privileged mindset of those running the show at the IAM.
I will continue to rail against ANY forced inclusion in a TA for LAA employees without voting the TA down otherwise.
So could the price of oil if it hits $100 a barrel. No relevance but go ahead and support the closing of another thread. I guess negotiations are less important than the iampf lawsuit being discussed on a separate thread.WeAAsles said:And inclusion into the IAMPF could affect the negotiations progress, so it is part of this topic as well.
WeAAsles said:And on that one if we were being "forced" into the plan, you'd have to get in line behind me against that.
But I'll still read the "entire" TA before voting it down. With your kind of comment I might as well vote no if I don't get the Holliday I want as well. (My Birthday)
You're trying to lobby to have the thread closed. I hope you fail in that attempt.1AA said:So could the price of oil if it hits $100 a barrel. No relevance but go ahead and support the closing of another thread. I guess negotiations are less important than the iampf lawsuit being discussed on a separate thread.
Ok.conehead777 said:i want the pay and benefits restored so people make there mind whats important to them and there family so if someone votes no because they did not bring back our vacation we lost . whats it to you. i want every thing back that we lost. they took it all at one time they can bring back in one time. i want vote yes on anything short. but thats my right. and a no on the iampf i do not want them controlling my money
JMHO there are a lot of 'separate' issues that need separate threads.WeAAsles said:You're trying to lobby to have the thread closed. I hope you fail in that attempt.
Personally I want to know who wins the Football pool for the when we will get a TA?
Apologist? Go read what I said in the other thread and then sell your Drama to a Studio that's interested in buying. When the facts are drawn out in a court decision I'll fly with your opinions. Until then though. Not.xUT said:JMHO there are a lot of 'separate' issues that need separate threads.
Hiding them in one thread is disingenuous.
Yea, you twu apologists and iam apologists do no service to your constituents in trying to downplay the atrocities of the twu and iam.
I have been watching you apologists downplaying corruption/deception/lies in your union.
That's what you do.
Good that Roach dumped his iam job but ended up as the iammpf as a trustee.
Yea, no collusion here..
B) xUT
I believe there might be no way out of the force feed IAMPFdfw gen said:glad the DOL brought the suit against the administrates of the IAMPNF BEFORE we (if we ever) get a contract, hopefully there will be no way that option will be in there.
oh wait we did not get to vote on the association, and we have waited thru 18 months of the most PROFITABLE history in aviation to start negotiations. the association would probably be arrogant enough to try to force us into it anyway. seeing how much they really care about our interest or opinions.
Assuming that you are correct and the contract passes, does anyone know the least amount one would have "contribute" to be a participant?Koolcat said:I believe there might be no way out of the force feed IAMPF
Buck said:Assuming that you are correct and the contract passes, does anyone know the least amount one would have "contribute" to be a participant?