FDXLAG

D,

I actually think a strong or weak yes vote is moot. I think a weak no vote will make TA 2.0 happen sooner rather than later. A couple of more percent here, a little language tightened there and bada bing. I think a 70% no vote will mean 2 years at best, as we will have to start from scratch.

My real opinion of the A Plan is contract 2023 will have a hard freeze with the over 25 guys and under 10 guys teaming up to get a cash over cap B plan once it sinks in the soft freeze is here to stay.

busdriver12

Hey, don't let my complaining limit your emoticon usage. Feel free to use all the that you want. Dang it, now I've reached the limit already!

busdriver12

Good for you to get your thread back on topic.

I think it doesn't matter much, as far as a yes vote, whether it's 50% +1, or 100%. We'll have a new contract, and that is what we'll live by. There will be letters of agreement if it benefits both parties, in my opinion. There will be anger by the no voters, but everyone will get used to it, and we'll be spending our time here on APC trying to decipher the contract, prevent the company from taking advantage of the vagueness of certain sections and the fact that many of us may not fully understand the new provisions.

Different story as far as the no vote. If we have a very strong no vote, we have much more leverage (as far as showing solidarity) to renegotiate the TA. A weak no vote, not so much. In my humble opinion.

busdriver12

I tend to agree with this. I do not think our A plan will be getting any better, at any time, I believe this is the firm line in the sand for the company. They froze the A plan for all company employees except for us several years ago, and the liabilities are still enormous. I have a family member at FedEx who was expecting about a 7K monthly pension, and overnight it was frozen, now he's expecting about $2500. Just like that. Not sure if there are any major carriers left who still have an active A plan, besides UPS. Holding out for an improvement to the A plan, I think, is completely futile.

Obviously many people disagree with this. But after seeing what happened with so many other carriers, I have never counted on the A plan to fund my retirement. Nor social security.

DLax85

At the risk of self induced thread creep...

Can you please clarify your post above?

In 2023, the over 25 guys will have a "hard freeze"?

Isn't that our situation right now, and under this TA....for anyone who makes $260K or more?

Under the proposed pay rates, by 2023, the $260K cap will apply to ALL Captains (WB & NB) and senior WB FOs

Since the 2% multiplier stops at 25 years, what other "freeze" will need to occur?

What about guys between 10-25 years?

Would they somehow be "frozen" too?

Thanks for sharing your vision of where we will be with all of this in 8 years

DLax85

At the risk of putting words in your mouth, I assume you mean you've never counted on the A plan to "fully/solely" fund your retirement.

I agree

But most financial planners will talk about a 3 legged stool

- Your personal savings (IRAs, unmatched 401Ks, etc)

- Social Security (perhaps at a reduced rate of 75-80%)

- Company funded deferred compensation (Defined Benefit A, Defined Contribution - B or 401K match)

As one leg weakens, I assume it would be prudent to have the others strengthen

Do you feel the B fund has been strengthened appropriately?

busdriver12

Perhaps I should have talked to a financial planner a long time ago. My stool has a lot of legs. Real estate, ROTH investments, B fund, defined benefit pension payouts, social security, and kids who will strike it rich in internet startup companies. Okay, maybe the last one is a crapshoot, because even if they do strike it rich, what are the odds they would share it with me?

However, I separate these things out instead of grouping them together, because I don't actually count that any one of them isn't going to fail, they are all separate risks to me. Real estate gains could crash, be devastated by a major earthquake or landslide, our Roths could disappear into nothingness, the government could nationalize (ie confiscate) our 401K's like Argentina did, the defined benefits could vaporize like so many others did, the government could decide we're too wealthy for social security.....you get the drift. All scenarios seem farfetched, but in a (hopefully) long lifetime, anything can happen.


Absolutely not. It should have been raised significantly, with cash over cap.

FDXLAG

Yes there is a hard freeze for anyone whose high 5 is over 260K and 25 YOS. The difference is now it is beginning to dawn on everyone that this is it. As to what happens in between the over 25 and the new hires, that will be what is negotiated long after I am gone. Whatever the company thinks it will take to get 51%.

One thing that can't happen outside a court ruling or a Democrat pension redistribution similar to healthcare redistribution is to take away your benefits already earned. So a negotiated hard freeze like NW or a voluntary or involuntary two tiered system is possible. Run for office and be the guy that interprets the surveys would be my suggestion.

HIFLYR

Actually even though I am a No voter I agree! I would however prefer for the 2023 to happen now not in 2023 and that is why I am voting NO. I think that is what they will change if this TA is voted down.

SeeDub

Bingo!!!... If this TA passes with the continuing A plan soft freeze, the A plan is done in 2023. No Vote = We work now to put ourselves in a better position to deal with that eventuality while things are arguably in our favor. Yes Vote = We kick the can down the road to 2023, trying to deal with the continued loss of A Plan buying power from what will likely be a substantially less favorable bargaining position.