U to terminate pilot''s pension to fund other pensions !

[Cfm56]

Bottom line that I don't see mentioned much anywhere -- the results of deregulation are STILL taking place.

Prior to deregulation, airlines pretty much had monopolized exclusive routes and employeees demands for increased wages was taken care of by simply getting approval from the CAB to increase ticket prices to cover any increases in cost. Since the routes were "protected" there was no concern for any competitive pricing issue.

Some airlines like SWA know how to exist in the deregulated industry whereas most other airlines are still struggling with the new reality.

 

[savyinvestor]

My prediction is that the government will save the pilot pension then all this crying will be done. Savy

 

[SETMAXTHRUST]

AutoFixer:

I think you overestimate the ability of the average U pilot to continue his/her flying profession. As a 18 year U pilot, and a aviation consultant, I know for a fact, that airline/corporate/charter jobs are not currently available for most of the 3700 U pilots. There are several, and the pay is so sub-optimal, with NO retirement, that I believe we had better find a solution to this prior to 3.31.03!

 

[PITbull]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/8/2003 1018 AM DELLDUDE wrote:

[blockquote]

Dell,

I was playing it as I wrote it....Can you hear it?
----------------
On 2/8/2003 10:01:32 AM PITbull wrote:

I just can't believe what I am reading.

When is it "enough"? I don't look at this managment as any kind of heros of the Industry. I look at them as Pirates who raided all of us of everything we ever worked for and only thing that is left is a barely livable wage.

None of us have the ability to do a job action, otherwise, the picture may look different. Why else do you think there is this huge movement by Senator McCain to amend the RLA?

Why in God's name do people think that no body can go out there and either a) get another decent paying job, or B) open up a business? Why does most of this board sound so beaten down that they can't live without U? And don't start with the attacking and say "go find another job" cause 85% of the 4,700 f/as on Voluntary furlough are doing just that. Many many have extended their furlough on purpose. So don't give me cowardly answers.

I don't understand you folks. Thank god we are not living in the 1700. The American Revolution was fought over Independence from King George and the impedus to the Revolution was over Tea Tax. If you all were living then, I'd be seeing on this board, "Hey, live to fight another day", or "Better to just drink hot milk and just don't buy the tea", and forget going to battle.

If you think of the Civil Rights Movement, what would it be like if Rosa Parks WENT to the back of the bus as she was told....instead of not?

Yea, guess we're lucky our forefathers fought the Revolution instead of us and gave us our Independence and a Constitution so we could behave just like we do; afraid of protest or worse yet, critisize those that do.
----------------
[/blockquote]
i think you need theme music[img src='http://www.usaviation.com/idealbb/images/smilies/11.gif']
----------------
[/blockquote]

I was playing "Rocky" as I wrote it...lol
[img src='http://www.usaviation.com/idealbb/images/smilies/2.gif']

 

[delldude]

pitbull:i'm only saying dave is a savvy player...and even though he's reeked havoc at U i'm impressed at what hes been able to do with all involved..
later,
D/D

 

[savyinvestor]

deleted

 

[PITbull]

Piney,

I respect what you are saying,however, defined pension plans were brought into being for employees that spend 25-35 years in the same company, who have had average salaries/wages and who didn't make enough money to conrtibute to a 401K plan as the only source of income for retirement. You and I both know hat SS is and has always been in question. They keep extending the age for full ss benefits as time goes on and as folks are living longer. Reality is what we as a society allow to happen.

401K plans were brought about as a supplement to social security or for those whose company didn't offer a defined pension as a benefit. Through time, I believe Corporate executives got more and more greedy and don't want to fund these pensions. However, they have participated in a defined pension for themselves making over $250,000 plus dollars yearly. I don't think that Defined pensions were intended for those who make hundreds of thousands of dollars per year in salaries. I will say, that those who make over $100,000 salary make enough money to fully participate in a 401K. Those types of salaries were not as previlent in the 60s-70s-80s as they are today. With regard to a Defined Contributory plan, you have to make enough ofa salary or wage to contribute to the plan. Most of us do not. I would be very upset if our pilot brother and sisters forced the co. to terminate all plans in order for them to "feel better" sort of speak. Even at the pilots wage today, they can afford to contribute to their retirement.
If U gave all groups much more income in wages to contribute to a plan, then we might have something here. But unfortunately, we do not have that kind of management team. They believe if you can't make it here financially, go somewhere else, and don't "rain on our parade".

If a person who has been fortunate enough to stay with one company for 30 years and has not enjoyed an income of $100,000 a year or more, should have an entitlement as an investor of this company to participate in a defined pension plan. When these folks retire, they need to have enough money to pay for their medical needs in their golden years, and if our society finds just cause to eliminate the Defined pensions that help the average wage earner upon retirment, than Congress better come up with affordable supplemental medical for these types of individuals. Otherwise the cost to cover these individuals will be too high and unaffordable, and the medical delivery will only be for the RICH!

No one who consistently invests in the market over 30 years has been successful enough to make enough for a full retirement through stock funds/equities, I don't care how good someone may think they are. We have not had a 30 year straight bull market and NO ONE HAS A CRYSTALL BALL! Especially, those individuals who only made average earnings their entire careers at a particular co.

 

[ClueByFour]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/7/2003 10:05:30 PM U 737 PILOT wrote:

As documented in a recent ALPA letter to all U pilot's, the terminated pilot pension plan will provide 850 million in savings of which 580 million will go to pension increase funding for all other labor groups. The remaining 260 million will be pocketed by the company, most likely to be used to purchase RJ's for the U commuters which will be flying routes and passengers that were once flown by U mainline pilot's who are now in the unemployment line.
----------------
[/blockquote]

Missives put in writing by the U (or any other union) MEC don't necessarily constitute fact. If you believe that they do, after you are done "parking them," I've got a nice bridge that you might be interested in........

 

[BottomFeeder]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/9/2003 8:48:44 AM ClueByFour wrote:


Missives put in writing by the U (or any other union) MEC don't necessarily constitute fact. If you believe that they do, after you are done "parking them," I've got a nice bridge that you might be interested in........


----------------
[/blockquote]
*****************************************

Yeah yeah yeah

Management NEVER lies. Only Unions lie.

I supose the ENRON troubles was due to the employees as well.

What flavor of KOOL-AID are you drinking ClueByFour. Welcome to Jonestown.

 

[ClueByFour]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/9/2003 9:58:05 AM BottomFeeder wrote:

Management NEVER lies. Only Unions lie.

I supose the ENRON troubles was due to the employees as well.

What flavor of KOOL-AID are you drinking ClueByFour. Welcome to Jonestown.
----------------
[/blockquote]

I don't necessarily believe U's management either, genius.

And we are not talking about ENRON.

Again--if you blindly believe everything that the U ALPA MEC (or any other union) says to be gospel, I'd like to sell you some real estate.

The Kool-Aide I'm drinking? Whatever survives the cutbacks, although it usually involves Finlandia and/or gin and some form of green lime.

Cheers.

 

[diogenes]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/7/2003 10:05:30 PM U 737 PILOT wrote:

As documented in a recent ALPA letter to all U pilot's, the terminated pilot pension plan will provide 850 million in savings of which 580 million will go to pension increase funding for all other labor groups. [/blockquote]
------------------------------------------

So, if we accept this logic, one would also be forced to conclude the savings the company realized when they froze agent pensions in 94 subsidized ALPA's pension from 94 - 2002.

A simple thank you will suffice.

 

[tadjr]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/9/2003 6:54:20 PM diogenes wrote:

[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/7/2003 10:05:30 PM U 737 PILOT wrote:

As documented in a recent ALPA letter to all U pilot's, the terminated pilot pension plan will provide 850 million in savings of which 580 million will go to pension increase funding for all other labor groups. [/blockquote]
------------------------------------------

So, if we accept this logic, one would also be forced to conclude the savings the company realized when they froze agent pensions in 94 subsidized ALPA's pension from 94 - 2002.

A simple thank you will suffice.
----------------
[/blockquote]

Or maybe this means ours will reappear? [img src='http://www.usaviation.com/idealbb/images/smilies/1.gif'] I didnt think so.... [img src='http://www.usaviation.com/idealbb/images/smilies/8.gif']

 

[autofixer]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/9/2003 6:54:20 PM diogenes wrote:

[blockquote]

----------------

On 2/7/2003 10:05:30 PM U 737 PILOT wrote:


As documented in a recent ALPA letter to all U pilot's, the terminated pilot pension plan will provide 850 million in savings of which 580 million will go to pension increase funding for all other labor groups. [/blockquote]

------------------------------------------


So, if we accept this logic, one would also be forced to conclude the savings the company realized when they froze agent pensions in 94 subsidized ALPA's pension from 94 - 2002.


A simple thank you will suffice.
----------------
[/blockquote]
diogenes, not quite. By your logic all of the pensions were subsidized--not just ALPA's. But it really is apples and oranges. ALPA gave twice this time to preserve their pension. AFA and IAM did not. The other pensions costs have dramatically increased--due to the erosion in the stock market and low interest rates--while ALPA's has remained constant. However, due to ALPA's huge giveback, there is a pot of cash for the company to rob.

When your pension was frozen (not stolen as with ALPA), what did your union do to preserve it? What kind of efforts were made by your union to keep your pension solvent?

In a way, you were "lucky". You were forced into a 401k with a company match 10 years ago. You have the power of componding on your side. At least with a 401k, the robber barons cannot get their evil hands on your retirement(but watch out for congress in the future). ALPA will not be so lucky, as 50% of the group is over 50 with a mandatory age 60 retirement looming.

 

[PITbull]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/9/2003 7:22:44 PM PineyBob wrote:

PITbull,
The stock market over time is the one investment that has earned on average of 12% year over year. Has it declined over the last 60 years? Yes it has! So for someone who invests roughly 10% of their income and recieves a 50% employer match and earns minimum wage and on average of half the average return of 12% from the stock market will amass about $980,000.00 over 40 years. So find me a defined benefit plan that delivers that type of performance to a rank and file employee?

Also the example does not include pay increases or the impact of inflation to be fair!

That just points out the fraud of both Social Security and defined benefit plans. Remember SS was an election year ploy by FDR, Folks would recieve benefits @ age 65. The average life expectancy then was 55. They never figured people would live longer and the money isn't even invested. How cynical of our leaders in the midst of the great depression. Just one mans opinion
----------------
[/blockquote]

Piney,

With all due respect, this is my point.

You incite an average return of 12% if you invest in the market year after year. Inspite of a decline, you state if a minimum wage earner invested 10% of their income and had a 50% match over 40 years, and take 1/2 the 12% they would yeild $980,000 for retirement.

Great hypothesis. Way I figure this is find a person that was savy enough to invest in the market 40 years ago making minimum wage, putting 10% of their earnings in an investment that pretty much guaranteed him/her at least a 6% return year after year for 40 years and had such a GREAT employer that matched them 50cents on a dollar. Sounds good, but I'm not crazy to accept that as any real solution in anyones world. Most folks on minimum wage either live with many folks or live at home, and for your theory to work, someone else had to provide them with food and shelter, and go to "good will" to pick up the style of the day. The hell with a vacations for 40 years, and don't get married and have kids in those 40 years cause you'll have to give them away or rob a "stop and go". And, don't think about education loans cause you're not going to pay the loan back. And better not think of buying a car, cause if you buy a heap that you can afford, you need money to fix it.
And for Pete's sake, whatever you do, don't get sick!

If one makes it in life on min. wage and invests in the market 10% of their income forfeiting all above, then maybe, your hypothesis could work. And, let me know the employer who was willing to give a match of 50 Cents on the dollar for at least 40 years.

All I know is I thought I was a savy investor. Did pretty well for about 10 years, then boom. Never thought we would have such a down turn. And if I'd had a crystal ball I would know to pull out or transfer in investments that were more sustaining (if their is such an animal), total net loss $177,000. Good job, and I listened to the professionals. My point was in "generality" not if a few people could have this success. Your hypothesis is just not realistic if applied to the average person and the average wage earner.

Realistically speaking, I will take ss and a defined pension any day, the hell with keeping up with COLA.

PS. Keep in mind, that min. wage was much lower in previous years than where it stands at present, and most employers give min. wage earners dimes per year if any for increases.

 

[PITbull]

I respect what you say. Putting this all in prospective, Corporations have a better chance of handling the risk than the individual. Most folks today depend on SS. My parents imigrated here in the 50s and had a restaurant for 40 years. They had to send money to my grandparents and relatives for them to survive as in many countries there is no ss, but there is socialized medicine; if there was not, they would not have survived.

A little bit of something guaranteed, is better than nothing. And thank god for the Erisa Act and the PBGC to protect retirements.

It seems now it is an epidemic to get rid of defined plans. Some part of that equation is related to the Stock Market, but most is related to an opportunity for Corporations with defined plans to rid themselves of them.

Thanks for sharing your persspective.