Another Dagum 65 Rant!
12-14-2007, 01:04 PM
#11
Nice lookin' tree, there!
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: Tool-Box, old man
Posts: 2,204
<FONT face=ArialMT color=#231f20 size=2>
<P align=left>A300_Driver,</P>
<P align=left> </P>
<P align=left>This is what I am talking about. Straight from the CBA. A pilot who turn age 59 gets a check for $25,000 in his HRA fund and can continue to fly until age 65 (where is completely covered by the company). He can still access his HRA while being covered by the company and then being covered by Medicare. THIS WAS NOT THE PURPOSE OF VEBA AND IS A HUGE LOOPHOLE THAT PEOPLE ARE GOING TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF. Section 27.H.7</P>
<P align=left> </P>
<P align=left>b. For each eligible active pilot (i) having a seniority list number on August 25, 2006, (ii) who has attained at least age 53 before January 1, 2007, (iii) who is expected to meet the age and service requirements for coverage under the Retiree Group Health Plan as of his attainment of age</P>
<P align=left>60 or older, and (iv) who retires on or after August 26, 2006, the Company will make a one-time cash payment of restricted signing bonus to the VEBA equal to $25,000. Such contributions shall be made no later than January 28, 2007 (90 days after October 30, 2006). The contribution</P>
<P align=left>and interest attributable thereto shall be transferred to the HRA established with respect to that pilot upon the date that the pilot attains age 59, or if earlier, as soon as practicable after the pilot dies. If a pilot attains age 59 or dies prior to the date that the Company funds the VEBA pursuant to this Section 27.H.7.b., the contribution and interest attributable to such pilot shall be transferred to the HRA as soon as</P>
<P align=left>possible after the date on which the Company funds the VEBA.</P>
<P align=left>c. <U>HRA contributions will not be reduced for a pilot who continues as an active employee past age 60.</U></P>
<P align=left><U>d. There is no requirement that a pilot participate in a Company-sponsored Pre-Medicare health care plan when he retires in order to use his HRA or to receive an HRA contribution.</U></P>
<P align=left><U>e. A pilot’s HRA may be used for reimbursement of any quali</U></FONT><FONT face=ArialMT color=#231f20 size=2><U>fi</U></FONT><FONT face=ArialMT color=#231f20 size=2><U>ed medical expenses while retired, including participant premium contributions, whether before or <STRONG>after</STRONG> Medicare eligibility</U>. Any unused amounts in the HRA at the time of the pilot’s death (whether before or after retirement)</P>
<P align=left>may be used for reimbursement of any quali</FONT><FONT face=ArialMT color=#231f20 size=2>fi</FONT><FONT face=ArialMT color=#231f20 size=2>ed medical expenses of the eligible surviving spouse and any other eligible surviving dependents. Any unused amounts in the HRA at the last to die of the pilot, eligible surviving spouse and eligible surviving dependents will be forfeited to the VEBA.</P></FONT>
<P align=left>A300_Driver,</P>
<P align=left> </P>
<P align=left>This is what I am talking about. Straight from the CBA. A pilot who turn age 59 gets a check for $25,000 in his HRA fund and can continue to fly until age 65 (where is completely covered by the company). He can still access his HRA while being covered by the company and then being covered by Medicare. THIS WAS NOT THE PURPOSE OF VEBA AND IS A HUGE LOOPHOLE THAT PEOPLE ARE GOING TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF. Section 27.H.7</P>
<P align=left> </P>
<P align=left>b. For each eligible active pilot (i) having a seniority list number on August 25, 2006, (ii) who has attained at least age 53 before January 1, 2007, (iii) who is expected to meet the age and service requirements for coverage under the Retiree Group Health Plan as of his attainment of age</P>
<P align=left>60 or older, and (iv) who retires on or after August 26, 2006, the Company will make a one-time cash payment of restricted signing bonus to the VEBA equal to $25,000. Such contributions shall be made no later than January 28, 2007 (90 days after October 30, 2006). The contribution</P>
<P align=left>and interest attributable thereto shall be transferred to the HRA established with respect to that pilot upon the date that the pilot attains age 59, or if earlier, as soon as practicable after the pilot dies. If a pilot attains age 59 or dies prior to the date that the Company funds the VEBA pursuant to this Section 27.H.7.b., the contribution and interest attributable to such pilot shall be transferred to the HRA as soon as</P>
<P align=left>possible after the date on which the Company funds the VEBA.</P>
<P align=left>c. <U>HRA contributions will not be reduced for a pilot who continues as an active employee past age 60.</U></P>
<P align=left><U>d. There is no requirement that a pilot participate in a Company-sponsored Pre-Medicare health care plan when he retires in order to use his HRA or to receive an HRA contribution.</U></P>
<P align=left><U>e. A pilot’s HRA may be used for reimbursement of any quali</U></FONT><FONT face=ArialMT color=#231f20 size=2><U>fi</U></FONT><FONT face=ArialMT color=#231f20 size=2><U>ed medical expenses while retired, including participant premium contributions, whether before or <STRONG>after</STRONG> Medicare eligibility</U>. Any unused amounts in the HRA at the time of the pilot’s death (whether before or after retirement)</P>
<P align=left>may be used for reimbursement of any quali</FONT><FONT face=ArialMT color=#231f20 size=2>fi</FONT><FONT face=ArialMT color=#231f20 size=2>ed medical expenses of the eligible surviving spouse and any other eligible surviving dependents. Any unused amounts in the HRA at the last to die of the pilot, eligible surviving spouse and eligible surviving dependents will be forfeited to the VEBA.</P></FONT>
fbh
12-14-2007, 01:22 PM
#13
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: B767/CPT
Posts: 56
YJ,
I am in agreement about bumping up the raises for the FOs in the next contract. My proposal is to "model" a few typical careers at FDX before the age change, and a realistic career after the change with the pilot STILL retiring at 60. Then take a look at the differences in the numbers...
There is no way to recoup that whole loss, nor should there be. The captain's position is (almost) everyone's goal, and we want our captains rewarded. However, I also think there is room to bump up the pay scale for those trapped on the low side of the age 60 upgrade curve. The battle will be of course where we get the money...who gives up something?
I think there has got to be a way to share the "windfall" that some at our company will now reap. I'll probably get told to "stuff it", but with enough support from the junior blocks I don't think its unreasonable. Right now I think only 2 MEC reps or MEC reps elect are FOs. However, whenever the union has negotiatied, they always say "no one gets a free pass, and nobody gets left behind" I'm not the only guys only 100 numbers away from narrow body captain that will probably be waiting in the wings another 3-5 years, and I think there is enough "gravy" in those 5 extra years to share with some whose career expectations have taken a sudden setback.
Start throwing out some (reasonable) ideas. The whole "I won't eat with you, you are a greedy bastard" chat won't fix anything. However, maybe together we can mitigate some of the career damage.
I am in agreement about bumping up the raises for the FOs in the next contract. My proposal is to "model" a few typical careers at FDX before the age change, and a realistic career after the change with the pilot STILL retiring at 60. Then take a look at the differences in the numbers...
There is no way to recoup that whole loss, nor should there be. The captain's position is (almost) everyone's goal, and we want our captains rewarded. However, I also think there is room to bump up the pay scale for those trapped on the low side of the age 60 upgrade curve. The battle will be of course where we get the money...who gives up something?
I think there has got to be a way to share the "windfall" that some at our company will now reap. I'll probably get told to "stuff it", but with enough support from the junior blocks I don't think its unreasonable. Right now I think only 2 MEC reps or MEC reps elect are FOs. However, whenever the union has negotiatied, they always say "no one gets a free pass, and nobody gets left behind" I'm not the only guys only 100 numbers away from narrow body captain that will probably be waiting in the wings another 3-5 years, and I think there is enough "gravy" in those 5 extra years to share with some whose career expectations have taken a sudden setback.
Start throwing out some (reasonable) ideas. The whole "I won't eat with you, you are a greedy bastard" chat won't fix anything. However, maybe together we can mitigate some of the career damage.
Interesting ideas. But the one thing that must be accomplished in order for anything to improve is individual responsibility. One must read the information put out by the union (age 60, LOA, CBA) in order to make an informed decision. Having someone in a "leadership" position tell you what something means instead of reading it for yourself is inconscionable, and you deserve the outcome if you let that happen. With that said, your attitude toward serving the group(union) seems genuine and will go along way towards establishing credibility in the union, if others do the same.
Age 65 is here whether we like it or not, but if we maintain status quo in our belief that the union fairly represents us all we are doomed to the same inequities "bargained" for us last contract, the LOA, and age 60 representation. Age 65 will have a significant impact on one's career here a FEDEX, lets not believe it won't, just check the number of age 60+ SO's, retirement charts, and 3 to 2 seat aircraft transitions. One overlooked aspect of the age change is that we have the potential of keeping the same ALPA leadership around for another 5 years. Just think about that, and what their "leadership" has already cost us. Remember our unions only "dog in the fight" was to make sure the over 60 crowd got back to the front seat, period. The CBA's tangable money went in large part those who are senior. And the LOA, well enough said on that issue.
Junior CA's, FO's, SO's, read....read...read...and vote...vote...vote... it's the only way to change things
12-14-2007, 01:29 PM
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Posts: 117
As far as flying past 60. I still have over 20 years until I reach 60. By that time I can't imagine the penalty for retiring at age 60. Plus, I am still waiting for the next big shoe to fall. At our next contract negotiations, I can foresee the company saying "Well, seeing you wanted to fly to 65 years old I guess there is no more need for us to fund the B-Fund. Especially since the tax advantage we received no longer exists because you wanted to fly until 65."
12-14-2007, 01:30 PM
#15
Trust but Verify!!
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: MD11 CRA
Posts: 684
"Start throwing out some (reasonable) ideas. The whole "I won't eat with you, you are a greedy bastard" chat won't fix anything."
While I agree with you to some degree (do you eat with non members though?) I do think those like FH and anyone else in APAAD deserve such treatment. Also, I think anyone coming back from the S/O seat expecting welcome banners from those in the crew room will be disappointed and should be. More to Young Jack's point, it seems those 53 and over as of the signing of our contract certainly gained the most from the contract and now from the Age change. We gave a lot in negotiating capital to get them these benefits. Now they will be wasted to a large degree as about 50% of those turning 60 have stayed so far. Now that there is no danger of going to the S/O seat I expect that number to increase. Anyway, I digress. My point is the raises and benefits in the next contract should be focused on those who were not 53 and over when we sign the next one. In other words, if we sign the next contract 5 years from the last, those 58 or younger should be the focus. I am not saying to deny those over 58 of raises, etc. Just do a reverse of what happened in this contract. 58 and younger get the lion share of the increases just like 53 and older did last time. How we make that come about is a different question. Let's not give any incentives to fly past Age 60 for sure. Also, anyone who chooses to fly past 60 should not be eligible for the 25K Zog speaks of. Period and exclamation point.
While I agree with you to some degree (do you eat with non members though?) I do think those like FH and anyone else in APAAD deserve such treatment. Also, I think anyone coming back from the S/O seat expecting welcome banners from those in the crew room will be disappointed and should be. More to Young Jack's point, it seems those 53 and over as of the signing of our contract certainly gained the most from the contract and now from the Age change. We gave a lot in negotiating capital to get them these benefits. Now they will be wasted to a large degree as about 50% of those turning 60 have stayed so far. Now that there is no danger of going to the S/O seat I expect that number to increase. Anyway, I digress. My point is the raises and benefits in the next contract should be focused on those who were not 53 and over when we sign the next one. In other words, if we sign the next contract 5 years from the last, those 58 or younger should be the focus. I am not saying to deny those over 58 of raises, etc. Just do a reverse of what happened in this contract. 58 and younger get the lion share of the increases just like 53 and older did last time. How we make that come about is a different question. Let's not give any incentives to fly past Age 60 for sure. Also, anyone who chooses to fly past 60 should not be eligible for the 25K Zog speaks of. Period and exclamation point.
12-14-2007, 02:23 PM
#16
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2006
Posts: 2,889
FDD,
I agree with you on the benefits of the last contract. You may have noticed I haven't posted much on 60...its a very emotional issue for me too. The bottom 727 captain has about 100 numbers on me...so I can succomb to emotions too. However, the fact is it won't do any good.
We can throw tantrums, or we can do some business. Like it or not, to get the bucks, protect the benefits, and move forward I may very well have to sit down over dinner with a dude or two that hung around after 60. FH may be gloating on the boards, but he won't be in the room where negotiations take place. However, there are some guys--a little less spiteful--who will be willing to discuss how to divide the spoils a little more fairly. They won't do that, however, if we polarize them.
For what its worth, I remember when I joined the F-15 guard unit as a part timer pre 9/11. The expectation was the part time slots would be very competetive and taking care of guys and making sure they could get promoted on time meant guys had to GET OUT OF THE WAY when they hit 20 years. The guy who hired me said something like "the day you hit 20 years, we'll throw you a party, a fini flight, give you a plaque, and celebrate all you've done....if you show up for a day after 20 we are going to shoot you in the base of the skull with a .22..." In other words, you were hired, and you knew the score. Get yours...enjoy it...then GET OUT OF THE WAY. I liked that system. However, 9/11 changed it....AGR slots got tough to get and part time slots were only coveted by guys with jobs....a few stragglers at Delta and two of us at FDX. Congress changed the airline game the way 9/11 changed the ANG. Personally--I detest it, and it hurts me a lot more than it hurts some guys--remember that I have a side business preparing folks for major airline interviews. Guess how age 65 will hurt that? So--on a personal level--I am as disappointed and frustrated in the setback as anyone.
However, I got another job. I have to work (starting in March) to try to help ALL of us. I also know that if we draw a line down the guantlet between FOs and Captains when we need to all stick together it will be hard to do. I agree that VEBA, trip rigs, the Anchorage passover abortion, age 60, and even the LOA all seem to point to some senior folks looking out primarily for THEIR interests. Trust me...I noticed too. And I want to try to work to regain some ground in the next contract. But I cannot do that without the help and support of some guys who have already "gotten theirs...", and that means we work for the common good.
You'll get a shot at making contract inputs again--that's one thing I thought we did do right last time. While pushing the over-60 guys out on a ice flow might be satisfying thought, thats all it is...a fantasy. The reality is a bunch of folks have changed the rules on us, and to help offset the damage we all get to try to work together. I think some of that senior crowd can be magnanimous to help the rest of us out. If they cannot--I promise I'll be the first to point it out.
I agree with you on the benefits of the last contract. You may have noticed I haven't posted much on 60...its a very emotional issue for me too. The bottom 727 captain has about 100 numbers on me...so I can succomb to emotions too. However, the fact is it won't do any good.
We can throw tantrums, or we can do some business. Like it or not, to get the bucks, protect the benefits, and move forward I may very well have to sit down over dinner with a dude or two that hung around after 60. FH may be gloating on the boards, but he won't be in the room where negotiations take place. However, there are some guys--a little less spiteful--who will be willing to discuss how to divide the spoils a little more fairly. They won't do that, however, if we polarize them.
For what its worth, I remember when I joined the F-15 guard unit as a part timer pre 9/11. The expectation was the part time slots would be very competetive and taking care of guys and making sure they could get promoted on time meant guys had to GET OUT OF THE WAY when they hit 20 years. The guy who hired me said something like "the day you hit 20 years, we'll throw you a party, a fini flight, give you a plaque, and celebrate all you've done....if you show up for a day after 20 we are going to shoot you in the base of the skull with a .22..." In other words, you were hired, and you knew the score. Get yours...enjoy it...then GET OUT OF THE WAY. I liked that system. However, 9/11 changed it....AGR slots got tough to get and part time slots were only coveted by guys with jobs....a few stragglers at Delta and two of us at FDX. Congress changed the airline game the way 9/11 changed the ANG. Personally--I detest it, and it hurts me a lot more than it hurts some guys--remember that I have a side business preparing folks for major airline interviews. Guess how age 65 will hurt that? So--on a personal level--I am as disappointed and frustrated in the setback as anyone.
However, I got another job. I have to work (starting in March) to try to help ALL of us. I also know that if we draw a line down the guantlet between FOs and Captains when we need to all stick together it will be hard to do. I agree that VEBA, trip rigs, the Anchorage passover abortion, age 60, and even the LOA all seem to point to some senior folks looking out primarily for THEIR interests. Trust me...I noticed too. And I want to try to work to regain some ground in the next contract. But I cannot do that without the help and support of some guys who have already "gotten theirs...", and that means we work for the common good.
You'll get a shot at making contract inputs again--that's one thing I thought we did do right last time. While pushing the over-60 guys out on a ice flow might be satisfying thought, thats all it is...a fantasy. The reality is a bunch of folks have changed the rules on us, and to help offset the damage we all get to try to work together. I think some of that senior crowd can be magnanimous to help the rest of us out. If they cannot--I promise I'll be the first to point it out.
12-14-2007, 02:32 PM
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Captain
Posts: 101
FreightDawgy is right. The problem with the CBA in the retirement section is that it is age based. What happen to years of service and senority? Crewmembers get multipliers based on age not years of service. Yes,yes,I know under the first contract this age thing was put into place because we, younger crewmembers, had more time to have contributions made to our B-plan, well times have change. Those of us under age 53 need to fight for retirement changes and start lobbying the MEC now. How about get rid of the age multipliers first off, then take that money and come up with a better early out program(age + years of service = 80 is full retirement), more B-plan money, changes to HRA funding and so on. We, the younger crewmembers, need to come to a consensus on what we need and then start putting people in place that will work on our behalf. Let us quit b******g about the law and plan/work for our collective future.
12-14-2007, 03:35 PM
#18
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: Row well and live...
Posts: 494
So here's a thought:
Bring the over 60 folks back with open arms. Glad to have you back! Pay passover for those 63-65 to stay in their current seat. Open a one time bid for new seat assignments. Announce it will be the only one for at least 18 months. And then...rebid the LOA with positions in HKG and CDG ONLY. Those who don't want to go, who are between 60-63...can retire gracefully.
The over 60's who really need the $$ can have their windows back, the LOA issue becomes a non-issue due to a.) it being filled, and b.) experience levels then being high. The int'l LOA mold is complete, the company dodges some lawsuits and possible bad publicity, and the pain for overall crew force is reduced to 18 months vice 5 yrs. Everybody gains a little something, and loses a little something in the process.
There's no doubt something missing here, and it's a long shot, but somewhere there might be a compromise out there that helps all sides...
Besides, I'd give myself a hernia laughing to hear FH say "Nee-Hao".
12-14-2007, 03:47 PM
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: MD-11
Posts: 395
This whole age 65 issue is nothing more than GREED from the over 60 crowd! Pure and Simple GREED! You mean a Captain making $200k+ a year can't make ends meet? You mean he needs to work until 65 because he needs SS which he cannot receive until 65?
The average wage earner in this country earns about one fourth our Captain's annual salary. But our captain needs to work until 65?
This is the biggest shaft job by the ALPA Maffia yet!! What is the point of supporting this lousy organization that has just cost the majority of pilots millions? (OH, I forgot, except for the greedy boys at the top!)
Shame on ALPA! Shame on the greedy punks who just dumped a big turd in all the junior guys' rice bowls! I for one will never trust ALPA again. There is no pay raise ALPA can negotiate to make up for these lost wages!
And just wait until the next contract. You think these airlines won't take advantage of this new turd? Say goodbye to B-Funds.
Shame, shame, shame!!!!!!
P.S. Don't let these greedy punks sleep their fat arses across the ocean. If they want the bucks, they're going to have to earn it!
P.P.S. I can't figure out which is worse, a scab who takes my job during a job-action, or an over 60 guy who takes my pay, upgrade, and junior buddy's job to feed his fat wallet! Buddy's only half a word!!!!
The average wage earner in this country earns about one fourth our Captain's annual salary. But our captain needs to work until 65?
This is the biggest shaft job by the ALPA Maffia yet!! What is the point of supporting this lousy organization that has just cost the majority of pilots millions? (OH, I forgot, except for the greedy boys at the top!)
Shame on ALPA! Shame on the greedy punks who just dumped a big turd in all the junior guys' rice bowls! I for one will never trust ALPA again. There is no pay raise ALPA can negotiate to make up for these lost wages!
And just wait until the next contract. You think these airlines won't take advantage of this new turd? Say goodbye to B-Funds.
Shame, shame, shame!!!!!!
P.S. Don't let these greedy punks sleep their fat arses across the ocean. If they want the bucks, they're going to have to earn it!
P.P.S. I can't figure out which is worse, a scab who takes my job during a job-action, or an over 60 guy who takes my pay, upgrade, and junior buddy's job to feed his fat wallet! Buddy's only half a word!!!!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
