FXLAX

I just realized that you are writing your response within your quote of my posts. The formatting on Tapatalk doesnt show it unless I tap SEE MORE. When I get some more time, I’ll go back and read this one and the previous one and respond.

FXLAX

Does the MLBPA not have a variable plan? Do other high wage earners not have a variable plan? I’m not saying they aren’t trying to sell it. I’m just saying I don’t impugne their motives. It’s obvious they feel it’s better than our current pension. And like I said, I don’t favor the PSPP. So I’m not sure why you would make a baseless accusation that I don’t want to see something when I’ve already said I rather they focus on improving the two plans we already have.

People are just to quick to accuse others of things that is just a difference of opinion. People can disagree without attacking their character. That’s been my point in this thread all along. They have a different opinion than us but that doesn’t make them bad people. Let’s take the emotion out of this so we can have a rational discussion.

Noworkallplay

Very well said, in fact it’s the point I have been trying to make all along also. I would rather improve what we currently have however, we need to have a plan B if the company refuses to increase our current A plan. We need to understand that the company knows they don’t have to do squat with the current A plan. Nothing in the RLA forces them to do it. Furthermore if we went to arbitration on it I can guarantee a ruling wouldn’t be in our favor since we are one of only 2 properties who has one and ours is the most lucrative A plan. So we need to look at other options if they refuse to increase the current formula. We have argued about a plan that we don’t even know the final numbers on and it’s a numbers driven plan. Up to this point it’s a concept. Let’s all step back and do our part which is the survey. If and when something comes forward for a vote then we can have a debate with hard numbers. Without hard numbers we are all just throwing out assumptions.

LETS ALL CHILL A BIT WE STILL HAVE AN A PLAN AND ARE TRYING TO IMPROVE IT.

DR K

no - MLB does not have a variable benefit plan type pension ala kiron nor do any high wage earners.

MLB has a pension like our A plan that is funded by each team in the league and based on longevity combined with high salary just like ours. There is a slice of that pension (20%) they CAN be infested in index type mutual funds. There are no hurdle rates or floors or pancakes and the value of that slice of their pension can absolutely go down based on market performance. It is in no way the same creature as this!

This has been covered ad nauseum in these threads which is why I stated that if you haven’t seen this it is because you have actively turned a blind eye to the info. On the first 3 pages of the Kiron videos on our YouTube page you will see plain as day the advertisement that MLB also has this type of VB pension we are hurdling towards (no pun intended) and I think it is totally deceitful.

Also no high wage earners have this one - if you look up the plan literature of all the given examples in our videos the highest earners are probably less than 80k per year - hotel employees and waiters and tugboat drivers and independent newspaper writers.

In my opinion these are 2 obvious falsehoods designed to trick us into thinking this is something healthy companies and rich employees sign up for - total BS.

when you couple this with fastburners points how can anyone take this proposal seriously?

to address your final statement - this situation is not about anybody “quick” to label or impugn or insinuate. This has been going on for several years now and emails to reps and surveys and principalEd and researched objections have not slowed it down. I’m afraid it is you who are slow to comprehend this disaster instead of us being quick to react out of emotion. It is a 3 year slow motion train wreck and 51% voting for the sales job will change the trajectory of your future and the word must get out.

Right now you have the gold standard of retirement in the airline industry that can be incrementally improved and you need to educate others about it and protect it instead of signing up for something that failing companies do and can put your retirement lifestyle or that of your surviving spouse at risk - especially a plan like this which has details no company has ever implemented before.

Please be more receptive to those like fastburner who should be consulted by the union instead of neglected. Your future self will thank you 357,000 times. DR K

DR K

this is a concept for failing pension plans and low wage earners trying to boost their unhealthy retirement, not for the frontline employees of a bellwether blue chip company.

once you prove that you are not LARPing on this website you will have more credibility but in the mean time you continue to help my cause of sounding the alarm on the perils of the experimental VB/PSPP/Big B Plan.

Because right now it seems like kronan and a guy who doesn’t work here think this VB plan is awesome and the former won’t tell us why he actually thinks the current plan is superior to the proposed plan despite it paying out triple with the same legal protections without requiring the same difficult funding levels. DR K

Noworkallplay

Are you serious? So if someone doesn’t fall in line with your way of thinking then “you don’t even work at FDX”. Even better yet “ go use the FCIF search table and tell me the subject of this FCIF”. Give me a break child. I’m not going to play your game.

Nightflyer

The fact that you "won't play your game" by simply proving you work here indicates to me that you don't.

Wasn't there another guy on this board that also claimed to work here but wouldn't prove it?

Hmmm.... perhaps they are one and the same?

FXLAX

Can we please dispense with the strawman and ad-hominems? If you really want people to educate others, then you wouldn’t be insulting them. All this reeks of pure emotional arguments. You don’t even acknowledge that I’m not in favor of the PSPP. So your post just seems very disingenuous, to say the least.

My only point is that the people in the union who are obviously advocating for don’t necessarily have bad intentions. If you think logically, that makes absolute zero sense. They genuinely feel this is best for us. People disagree. That doesn’t make them bad people.

When I look at the MLB plan, there is a part of their plan that is variable. As for high wage earners, I honestly don’t remember that comment. But even if they said that, MLB players are high wage earners. They are obviously trying to sell this. So of course they will make assertions that are true but may have caveats. That does not make them bad people. At worst, it just make them out of touch or simply wrong on what they think is the best plan.

If you want to change minds, keep calling them on the phone every ninety and make your arguments like you and others are doing here. But I’m not going to accept your version that these people are purposely trying to harm all of us.

This is the last I’ll post about the notion that the union is out to purposely screw us.

DLax85

FXLax -

What's your take on why the union seems to continue to pursue the Variable Benefit Plan....now remarketed as the PSPP...with such vigor?

Do you believe they've been fully genuine on describing all aspects of the plan, and showing specific examples on where a financially solvent Defined Benefit Plan was changed to this new model for the employee's benefit?

Do you believe the union has fully explored incremental changes to our current A plan and/or our Total Retirement Plan (A Fund + B Fund)....such as tying earnings cap to IRS 401(K) limits.... and/or other more simplistic enhancements like increasing the B fund to the level of our closest competitors? (i.e. match UPS 12% B Fund)

If so, have these other options been communicated/presented with the same vigor?

Do you believe the union is emotionally tied to the VBP/PSPP given how much time, energy and $$ they've already spent researching and marketing this plan? ...and is this clouding their vision or affecting their interaction with pilot group at-large?

Thanks for your views on where we are.

In Unity,
DLax

Noworkallplay

So explain to me why a bunch of FedEx pilots would want something that hurts themselves? Im guessing no less than 100 people have been directly or indirectly involved in this 5 year project. So all 100 of them are just plain idiots? All of them want to give themselves less? Just think that through.

In regards to your B plan increase I can answer that. Yes they have explained in detail the downfall of just increasing the B plan. 1.) older pilots don’t capture the gains due to YOS left. This is why we gave small groups A plan “bumps” in the past that only targeted groups got. Those targeted groups did not have the YOS left to capture the gains on the B plan increases over the years. 2.) We would move further away from the equal weight A vs B plan mix that we all like. At some point if you just increase the B plan most of your retirement will become variable and you no longer will have a fixed income portion or very small fixed income portion.

I asked numerous union reps and R and I peeps about the money spent on this project and they stated “ If at the end of the day the pilots dont want to go this direction, it was still money well spent to look at options”. I completely agree with this statement. Its always money well spent to have outside consulting and look at options.

Stop painting your peers as enemies because they are looking at options to INCREASE our pension. You are doing nothing but being divisive by doing such things. If you disagree with the mechanism to do it thats fine and your opinion. To insinuate they are lying and disingenuous is completely different and divisive troll speech.