Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
Yes, you do. It's called a defined contribution plan, and I wish that's all they'd had when I was first hired. It's real money paid to you every payday, instead of the promise of money payable 30 years from now.
BTW, your retirement has already been improved from what was in place when you got hired.
Mine??? Not so much.
BTW, your retirement has already been improved from what was in place when you got hired.
Mine??? Not so much.
Any resolution can be replaced or reinstated in the main session by a simple majority vote of the reps. The subcommittees can change them all they want, but the full MEC has the final say. Even resolutions that are opposed by every rep in the subcommittees still come to the floor before the main body.
The MEC Chairman has no vote, unless there's a tie.
Yes, you do. It's called a defined contribution plan, and I wish that's all they'd had when I was first hired. It's real money paid to you every payday, instead of the promise of money payable 30 years from now.
BTW, your retirement has already been improved from what was in place when you got hired.
Mine??? Not so much.
BTW, your retirement has already been improved from what was in place when you got hired.
Mine??? Not so much.
Please explain this to me. I am willing to listen but I do not think this statement is true.
Inventory survival kit ..
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: Seeking no jacket required rotations
Posts: 1,069
Are you sure?
Any resolution can be replaced or reinstated in the main session by a simple majority vote of the reps. The subcommittees can change them all they want, but the full MEC has the final say. Even resolutions that are opposed by every rep in the subcommittees still come to the floor before the main body.
The MEC Chairman has no vote, unless there's a tie.
Any resolution can be replaced or reinstated in the main session by a simple majority vote of the reps. The subcommittees can change them all they want, but the full MEC has the final say. Even resolutions that are opposed by every rep in the subcommittees still come to the floor before the main body.
The MEC Chairman has no vote, unless there's a tie.
Having said that, the DAL Policy sounds very similar to fNW Policy on everything coming back out of subcommittee. That was not true at all MECs.in the past.
Another thing that happens is only the subcommittee gets to listen to committee/guest/attorney viewpoints on their assigned Agenda items. They usually come out with a recommendation/amendment. Very rarely will the full MEC hear everything that was said about an item in subcommittee, its usually a summary given by the sub chair. In my past experience those viewpoints make a huge difference in the perception of an agenda item and the way I would subsequently vote. It's one of the things I hated about ALPA BOD meetings and not being placed on the subcommittee that had the agenda items I was interested in debating.
There is also the time factor. People start getting tired towards the end of a meeting and give the recommendation of the committee more weight. Lots of things start influencing the attention to detail exercised on agenda items and their exact language(if any). Its always a dynamic, especially in times of above average activity like Section 6, merger, strike prep etc.
Inventory survival kit ..
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: Seeking no jacket required rotations
Posts: 1,069
Routes flown were used as evidence at fNW in the Roberts Award for REPLACEMENT AIRCRAFT being added into the quotas.
That is how the A330 ended up in the DC-10 quota.
It was also unsuccessfully used to get A330 in the 747 generic quota when A330 started flying transpac and south of NRT.
Seems like they are rolling the dice on 777s delivered this year AFTER the closure of ANC/MSP and the retirement of the 747-200.
Those pilots who were hired at DAL or NWA after the DB plans were frozen have seen improvements to the DC plans that were in place on the day they got hired.
The rest of us, hired in a DB world, have had the retirement plan that was in place when we got hired dramatically reduced, via either termination or freeze. That was my point. Any of the pilots hired at NWA or DAL since 2006 have an excellent DC based retirement currently in place.
I'm simply trying to make the point that the new hires have nothing to complain about, when it comes to the retirement section of the contract. Can it go higher? Sure. But ramping up to 14% is a pretty good start.
It also brings up another question. The FMNW pilots have filed a grievance claiming that since the 777 is flying many former NWA routes in DTW it should not have been fenced and is a replacement aircraft.
If the NWA pilots are going to continue with that grievance then it stands to reason that the same thing applies to the 747 in NYC which will be flying Delta routes. It should not under that logic be a fenced aircraft. The bid should be a open bid.
If the NWA pilots are going to continue with that grievance then it stands to reason that the same thing applies to the 747 in NYC which will be flying Delta routes. It should not under that logic be a fenced aircraft. The bid should be a open bid.
Caddis,
Those pilots who were hired at DAL or NWA after the DB plans were frozen have seen improvements to the DC plans that were in place on the day they got hired.
The rest of us, hired in a DB world, have had the retirement plan that was in place when we got hired dramatically reduced, via either termination or freeze. That was my point. Any of the pilots hired at NWA or DAL since 2006 have an excellent DC based retirement currently in place.
I'm simply trying to make the point that the new hires have nothing to complain about, when it comes to the retirement section of the contract. Can it go higher? Sure. But ramping up to 14% is a pretty good start.
Those pilots who were hired at DAL or NWA after the DB plans were frozen have seen improvements to the DC plans that were in place on the day they got hired.
The rest of us, hired in a DB world, have had the retirement plan that was in place when we got hired dramatically reduced, via either termination or freeze. That was my point. Any of the pilots hired at NWA or DAL since 2006 have an excellent DC based retirement currently in place.
I'm simply trying to make the point that the new hires have nothing to complain about, when it comes to the retirement section of the contract. Can it go higher? Sure. But ramping up to 14% is a pretty good start.
It definitely sucks to lose a pension when you're halfway through your career. But, with the BrokerageLink and the boost I got from the note and claim, I (at age 50) am on track to have pretty much what I would have had with the pension. But, in this case, the money is mine and cannot be taken away through bankruptcy like the pension was! Now if we could just get some decent pay restoration (and therefore get those contributions amounts higher into the plans), then many of us (even the senior guys) could come out better than we would have had with the pension.
Of course, some will argue that the returns necessary to achieve success with our plans is not guaranteed. Well, a pension certainly isn't guaranteed either.... as we have all found out the hard way. And, like Pineapple said, it's a real no-brainer for the new guys. I just wish we had had this setup from the beginning for us older guys!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post