Why no contract from the Association?

[1AA]

If the IAMPF is in our next JCBA can the association force us to participate?
This ruling has set a precedent for future union pension enrollments against an individuals will.

http://www.heritage.org/jobs-and-la...tion-could-force-workers-underfunded-pensions

 

[WeAAsles]

If the IAMPF is in our next JCBA can the association force us to participate?
This ruling has set a precedent for future union pension enrollments against an individuals will.

http://www.heritage.org/jobs-and-la...tion-could-force-workers-underfunded-pensions

The Heritage Foundation now? Your true colors and desperation are beginning to shine through now man. You're grasping.

Oh and I guess no one ever informed you that the Employee Free Choice Act has been DOA?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employee_Free_Choice_Act

 

[WeAAsles]

The problem is private sector union numbers have dropped steadily over the last 30 years, nearly 50% in that time frame.

The Gless letter is a classic example of why union numbers are dropping, big industrial unions overstepping their bounds just makes the job of unionizing harder.

You're right. Even worse forming Associations without putting them to a vote of the entire membership "BEFORE" they're sent off to the NMB asking for outright certification.

Those types of behind the curtain deals circumventing the membership reverberate out to other groups looking or hoping to be organized and give the antis fuel for their fire. And they create (In all fairness) mistrust among the represented members.

And they also come with the consequences where Jim Little is ousted and Bobby Gless is back turning a wrench in a JFK hanger. But it's too late cause the lingering damage to reputation is already done.

 

[swamt]

If the IAMPF is in our next JCBA can the association force us to participate?
This ruling has set a precedent for future union pension enrollments against an individuals will.

http://www.heritage.org/jobs-and-la...tion-could-force-workers-underfunded-pensions

This quote really stood out to me; "This would improve union finances but threaten the retirement security of millions of American workers." This is soooo true, even the experts claim it. 10-20n years there will be no more pensions for the multi employer funds. Private and single pensions as well as CEO's pensions will be ok, of course.

 

[WeAAsles]

This quote really stood out to me; "This would improve union finances but threaten the retirement security of millions of American workers." This is soooo true, even the experts claim it. 10-20n years there will be no more pensions for the multi employer funds. Private and single pensions as well as CEO's pensions will be ok, of course.

ANY and ALL investments you make come with risks. ANY and ALL.

And in 10 or 20 years there will be no more multi employer funds? Another guy here with a crystal ball.

Game, set, match. Corporations completely pulled the wool over your eyes and have you walking in lock step hand in hand with their narrative.

 

[1AA]

Without the financial support from the AA guys it's possible the IAMPF will end up down the same road. They need our money for temporary life support to pay out to people we don't even know or work for AA. Our money going out to strangers.
The PBGC is no longer that secure backup that we all once relied on in case of financial failure of union pensions.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/kansas...lumns-blogs/mary-sanchez/article61178627.html

 

[WeAAsles]

Without the financial support from the AA guys it's possible the IAMPF will end up down the same road. They need our money for temporary life support to pay out to people we don't even know or work for AA. Our money going out to strangers.
The PBGC is no longer that secure backup that we all once relied on in case of financial failure of union pensions.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/kansas...lumns-blogs/mary-sanchez/article61178627.html

Yes you could absolutely be correct? I don't know about "temporary" lifeline though. That's overstating the circumstances looking at the fund currently.

BTW what do you think will happen to your 401k when the Chickens come home to roost when the bill needs to be paid for the massive underfunding of Government, City and State Pensions? Are us Taxpayers going to have to foot that bill or do our citizens become homeless and we let them die?

Either way there's going to come a cost for them out of yours and mines pockets.

DIVERSITY/DIVERSIFY.

 

[1AA]

If the IAMPF makes these same promises should we be concerned? If they try to scam us in giving credited time above the actual time in the plan where will the extra money come from? Will the taxpayers pay for the miss management and false promises of the IAMPF? Bottom line is they desperately need our money to keep the pyramid scam going.

https://www.google.com/amp/dailysig...er-bailout-of-private-union-pension-plan/amp/

 

[Koolcat]

Multi-employer pension promise;
"That promise is in jeopardy today, not because anybody
wants it to be; not because, in my opinion, because people have
mismanaged. I think there have been some mismanaged funds but I
think by and large this is not a problem of mismanagement. It
is a problem of a horrendous economic situation that crested in
2008, about 5 years ago.
People stopped building houses. They stopped building
convenience stores and schools.
They stopped buying goods that are trucked over the
country's roads. And as those things happened jobs bled out of
the economy, profits bled out of employers, and we got
ourselves to a situation where the amount of money being paid
into those pension funds in many cases was insufficient to
cover the benefits that are being paid out and that will be
paid out in the future. That is the problem.
There is a harsh reality that if--if something is not done
for some of those plans--some, not all--that we will reach a
day when the plans will cease to exist and they will be turned
over to the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation. What that
generally means, not always, but what it generally means is a
60 percent benefit cut for people who are receiving pensions.
Sixty percent."

 

[WeAAsles]

If the IAMPF makes these same promises should we be concerned? If they try to scam us in giving credited time above the actual time in the plan where will the extra money come from? Will the taxpayers pay for the miss management and false promises of the IAMPF? Bottom line is they desperately need our money to keep the pyramid scam going.

https://www.google.com/amp/dailysig...er-bailout-of-private-union-pension-plan/amp/

I highly doubt they could legally give us actual time over credited time. As I understood it we just wouldn't have to physically be in the plan for 5 years to draw something back out of it. (Vesting period)

They're not going to give me my 22 years with AA worth of payouts.

 

[CremaDiLimone]

You think LAA stand alone would be making $30 with the company prospering? Well there are a lot of analysts who would disagree with you. Honestly all kidding aside it really is water under the bridge we are what we are. If you think I'm being selfish or in your mind ungrateful so be it

as far as AA stand-alone; it's all hypothetical. my personal opinion is that i was for the merger because i did not like aa's plan. i'm not sure which analysts and for what reason they would talk about stand-alone aa fscs earning $30/hr. maybe they are the same analysts that say that stand-alone us air ground workers would be earning $35/hr? i'm not sure where you where going with that.

we currently know that the usa's 3rd most profitable airline (ua) will pay it's ground workers the airline's most generous max pay rate at $33.30/hr - shift differential, not included. so, who knows?

as far as being selfish..you said you are ok with the status quo. more holidays/better health plan for you/denied to laa fscs in lieu of higher pay/higher insurance plans for all. what part of that isn't self-centered? i said i don't have a problem with that, i appreciate the honesty.

I guess I interpreted your post #354 wrong sure sounded to me you feel AA as the Knight in shining armor. Just out of curiosity are your managers more respectful and have a different tone towards employees since the merger?

aa a knight in shining armor? aa was what it was. the stronger partner in a partnership. i suppose you can try and deny/reject that. does one need to make a laundry list of why and how? as far as that partnership, there is a truism or two that you may not like, but who is trying to rub it in? months ago, i made a post about the seniority issue/twu...that said you were the competition for decades. did laa do better than lus during the 80s-90s? i believe it did and i was part of that. did lus file for bk twice in the early 2000s? did laa file for bk when every legacy carrier did? i had a problem with former competitors keeping their seniority in a new airline; blended with laa fscs who could not obtain their company seniority...in a company named 'aa'.

twa? twa was acquired by aa, us air did not acquire aa.

when us air merged with piedmont, did your pay rocket up? when america west acquired us air, did your pay rocket up? so, what was the uncommon denominator as to why things got dramatically better for lus employees this 3rd time? is/was it laa? were 1988 piedmont airlines and 2005 america west airlines similar to american airlines of 2013?

can you compare laa to piedmont airlines or america west airlines? if it makes you feel better about lus...ok.

as far as managers...i've worked under 1 lus supervisor and i believe he is quality. though i did stop listening after 2 sentences when he explained that laa were chocking planes incorrectly for the past 30 years. a recent batch of supervisors were recently (2-3 years) hired from envoy/eagle and the quality dramatically drops.

former lus mngt. higher-ups in my station attempted to change and now seemed to have bent on changing some operational logistics. this isn't phx and i believe they are understanding that now and learning on the fly. it has been mentioned that they were originally contemptuous of twu executives/relationship between mngt & labor...and that probably came from being conditioned at lus to ordering crews and leads around.

 

[Albert]

If the IAMPF makes these same promises should we be concerned? If they try to scam us in giving credited time above the actual time in the plan where will the extra money come from? Will the taxpayers pay for the miss management and false promises of the IAMPF? Bottom line is they desperately need our money to keep the pyramid scam going.

https://www.google.com/amp/dailysig...er-bailout-of-private-union-pension-plan/amp/

They would give you credited time but pay you only actual time. Now you are making things up. You don't want the plan that's cool. vote no if they mandatory participation it's that simple.You putting a lot of effort into something that is just hearsay. Why not wait until there is a tentative

 

[WeAAsles]

Multi-employer pension promise;
"That promise is in jeopardy today, not because anybody
wants it to be; not because, in my opinion, because people have
mismanaged. I think there have been some mismanaged funds but I
think by and large this is not a problem of mismanagement. It
is a problem of a horrendous economic situation that crested in
2008, about 5 years ago.
People stopped building houses. They stopped building
convenience stores and schools.
They stopped buying goods that are trucked over the
country's roads. And as those things happened jobs bled out of
the economy, profits bled out of employers, and we got
ourselves to a situation where the amount of money being paid
into those pension funds in many cases was insufficient to
cover the benefits that are being paid out and that will be
paid out in the future. That is the problem.
There is a harsh reality that if--if something is not done
for some of those plans--some, not all--that we will reach a
day when the plans will cease to exist and they will be turned
over to the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation. What that
generally means, not always, but what it generally means is a
60 percent benefit cut for people who are receiving pensions.
Sixty percent."

Unions should NEVER have gotten involved with Pension funds or any management of their members finances outside of just negotiating the best deals they could for their members and servicing those contracts.

They should have continued the fight to have the Companies fund those retirement investments and there never would have been the level of animosity there is now if a Union focused or run Pension fund got into trouble.

They brought it upon themselves IMO.

 

[Albert]

Unions should NEVER have gotten involved with Pension funds or any management of their members finances outside of just negotiating the best deals they could for their members and servicing those contracts.

They should have continued the fight to have the Companies fund those retirement investments and there never would have been the level of animosity there is now if a Union focused or run Pension fund got into trouble.

They brought it upon themselves IMO.

There would have been no Las Vegas and no Bob

 

[Albert]

as far as AA stand-alone; it's all hypothetical. my personal opinion is that i was for the merger because i did not like aa's plan. i'm not sure which analysts and for what reason they would talk about stand-alone aa fscs earning $30/hr. maybe they are the same analysts that say that stand-alone us air ground workers would be earning $35/hr? i'm not sure where you where going with that.

we currently know that the usa's 3rd most profitable airline (ua) will pay it's ground workers the airline's most generous max pay rate at $33.30/hr - shift differential, not included. so, who knows?

as far as being selfish..you said you are ok with the status quo. more holidays/better health plan for you/denied to laa fscs in lieu of higher pay/higher insurance plans for all. what part of that isn't self-centered? i said i don't have a problem with that, i appreciate the honesty.



aa a knight in shining armor? aa was what it was. the stronger partner in a partnership. i suppose you can try and deny/reject that. does one need to make a laundry list of why and how? as far as that partnership, there is a truism or two that you may not like, but who is trying to rub it in? months ago, i made a post about the seniority issue/twu...that said you were the competition for decades. did laa do better than lus during the 80s-90s? i believe it did and i was part of that. did lus file for bk twice in the early 2000s? did laa file for bk when every legacy carrier did? i had a problem with former competitors keeping their seniority in a new airline; blended with laa fscs who could not obtain their company seniority...in a company named 'aa'.

twa? twa was acquired by aa, us air did not acquire aa.

when us air merged with piedmont, did your pay rocket up? when america west acquired us air, did your pay rocket up? so, what was the uncommon denominator as to why things got dramatically better for lus employees this 3rd time? is/was it laa? were 1988 piedmont airlines and 2005 america west airlines similar to american airlines of 2013?

can you compare laa to piedmont airlines or america west airlines? if it makes you feel better about lus...ok.

as far as managers...i've worked under 1 lus supervisor and i believe he is quality. though i did stop listening after 2 sentences when he explained that laa were chocking planes incorrectly for the past 30 years. a recent batch of supervisors were recently (2-3 years) hired from envoy/eagle and the quality dramatically drops.

former lus mngt. higher-ups in my station attempted to change and now seemed to have bent on changing some operational logistics. this isn't phx and i believe they are understanding that now and learning on the fly. it has been mentioned that they were originally contemptuous of twu executives/relationship between mngt & labor...and that probably came from being conditioned at lus to ordering crews and leads around.

When I was referring to the analyst I was referring to AA's prosperity not our pay. When PI merged with US there pay and benefits did go up. LUS also readjusted former Empire airlines employees seniority. It seems Pi had TWA'd Empire employees LUS did not think that was fair and gave the Empire folks there full seniority. When LUS merged with AW the AW folk did receive big wage increases on our first combined contract. Better check the 80's LUS did very well up to the merger I'm not sure about AA. If AA was doing so well why did they and the TWU come out with a B scale that screwed the whole industry?