*MINIMUM BALANCES* New Polling Needed
12-23-2019, 01:47 PM
#81
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,057
I think the argument is that if it was just a 9% DC increase with no minimum balance provision, the majority of the contract value wouldn’t be lumped into this one section. As it stand now, this section will consume most of the contract gains by a wide margin. I doubt anyone is arguing that an additional 9% wouldn’t be very beneficial.
12-23-2019, 04:04 PM
#82
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,535
i don't think you meant to quote me....and if you did, you completely misunderstood what side i'm on.
12-23-2019, 08:01 PM
#83
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2014
Position: Cirrus CA
Posts: 224
*MINIMUM BALANCES* New Polling Needed
I’m gonna go out on a limb and say you don’t know what side Tunes is on. Believe me: he’s a military guy and advocate of USERRA protections.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
12-24-2019, 02:27 AM
#84
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2018
Posts: 3,237
Now, see why there's a problem? It's not a military retirement. Inflation does have consequences, on that we agree!!
All are free to opine, not just CBreezy. What's the COLA?
Last edited by Buck Rogers; 12-24-2019 at 03:05 AM.
12-24-2019, 05:50 AM
#86
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2008
Position: VEOP Retired! 7ER A was last position
Posts: 978
I think the argument is that if it was just a 9% DC increase with no minimum balance provision, the majority of the contract value wouldn’t be lumped into this one section. As it stand now, this section will consume most of the contract gains by a wide margin. I doubt anyone is arguing that an additional 9% wouldn’t be very beneficial.
Come to think of it, why isn't ALPA publicly lobbying (all the airlines) for retirement restoration outside of section 6 negotiations?
12-24-2019, 05:57 AM
#87
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Road construction signholder
Posts: 2,432
Well you really can't have one without the other. The 9% is for the pilot group with a large number of years left. The "lump" is for those with just a few years left. What section the monies come from is meaningless.
Come to think of it, why isn't ALPA publicly lobbying (all the airlines) for retirement restoration outside of section 6 negotiations?
Come to think of it, why isn't ALPA publicly lobbying (all the airlines) for retirement restoration outside of section 6 negotiations?
12-24-2019, 06:34 AM
#88
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2008
Position: VEOP Retired! 7ER A was last position
Posts: 978
Who would we lobby? The rest of the country doesn't care. What would you say to the PBGC? Will you return all your claim and note money? Will you revoke your estimated PBGC benefits? How do you define retirement "restoration?" This is a very complex issue, with endless iterations.
12-24-2019, 06:48 AM
#89
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,057
Why can't you have one without the other? I know we have increased the DC % in the past without this min balance, how is this any different?
12-24-2019, 06:48 AM
#90
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Road construction signholder
Posts: 2,432
The BOD of Delta Air Lines to start. I'd gladly give my note/claim money back(most of which was taxed as ordinary income), and my pbgc for restoration of the 60% FAE DB. Moot points, never gonna happen. I'm talking what you do now, in the best financial environment Delta had ever been in.
I think assessing retiree medical in a robust manner would sell to the entire seniority list a lot better, even if it doesn't sound as exciting.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
