continental pension underfunding

[CitationLover]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/21/business/21pension.html

Typical reaction to a shoved down government regulation. Now imagine what the "stimulus" will do.

The problem in "funding" pensions is the apples to oranges problem. You fund with a single payment (spread out over "quarterly" contributions) and pay out with an annuity. Actuarial assumptions, are simply that: assumptions.

With interest rates continuing to drop, liabilities are only going to keep increasing (as interest rates go down, liabilities go up), even on a frozen plan like CAL's. Couple that with recent collapse of REIT's and Equities (which affects the other side of the equation: the assets) and you have a perfect storm. Its due to this relationship why pension funds swing wildly from "over"funded to "under"funded status. No amount of smoothing, etc can get you away from this. This is also why defined benefit plans are dying and slowly disappearing from benefit plans and switching to a much easier to fund defined contribution plans (401k, B funds, money purchase, profit sharing, etc.). When the equities market returns to a bullish state you will have articles stating the exact opposite: Pension funds being the single largest assets in corporate books (this happened in the late 90's and a few years ago).

 

[Flopgut]

When we [CAL pilots] negotiated the A plan to be frozen and the 100% lump sum be preserved the retirement age was 60. Since then we've had a great many retire normally and via the ERW. The entire A plan might now be superfulous to our needs going forward. Rather than lose a single cent protecting the plan we should pursue higher hourly wage, better work rules and job protections. You'll get no disagreement from the moderatly senior, young guys with several hundred thousand A plan dollars. They understand they can make it up, and they are in fact rather senior captains. It is, of course, the best thing for the junior guys as well. Now for the old guys? The ones that didn't take the ERW? Screw em! Sad, but we have to consider it. When the ERW dollars were put out there I was one of the first ones to take issue with what I thought was a small amount. I came to realize the amount offered was exactly what it should have been. CAL could have quadrupled the ERW amount and they would not have gotten even half as many participants. It's unfortunate, but true. The ones who stayed won't be ready no matter what. Doing anything for them would simply be throwing good money after bad. CAL understood it, CALALPA needs to do the same.

 

[CitationLover]

When we [CAL pilots] negotiated the A plan to be frozen and the 100% lump sum be preserved the retirement age was 60. Since then we've had a great many retire normally and via the ERW. The entire A plan might now be superfulous to our needs going forward. Rather than lose a single cent protecting the plan we should pursue higher hourly wage, better work rules and job protections. You'll get no disagreement from the moderatly senior, young guys with several hundred thousand A plan dollars. They understand they can make it up, and they are in fact rather senior captains. It is, of course, the best thing for the junior guys as well. Now for the old guys? The ones that didn't take the ERW? Screw em! Sad, but we have to consider it. When the ERW dollars were put out there I was one of the first ones to take issue with what I thought was a small amount. I came to realize the amount offered was exactly what it should have been. CAL could have quadrupled the ERW amount and they would not have gotten even half as many participants. It's unfortunate, but true. The ones who stayed won't be ready no matter what. Doing anything for them would simply be throwing good money after bad. CAL understood it, CALALPA needs to do the same.

curious....has the plan's "normal retirement age" been formally changed to 65 or is it still 60?

 

[Flopgut]

I've got to do little leg work on that. I forgot.

 

[Flopgut]

When we [CAL pilots] negotiated the A plan to be frozen and the 100% lump sum be preserved the retirement age was 60. Since then we've had a great many retire normally and via the ERW. The entire A plan might now be superfulous to our needs going forward. Rather than lose a single cent protecting the plan we should pursue higher hourly wage, better work rules and job protections. You'll get no disagreement from the moderatly senior, young guys with several hundred thousand A plan dollars. They understand they can make it up, and they are in fact rather senior captains. It is, of course, the best thing for the junior guys as well. Now for the old guys? The ones that didn't take the ERW? Screw em! Sad, but we have to consider it. When the ERW dollars were put out there I was one of the first ones to take issue with what I thought was a small amount. I came to realize the amount offered was exactly what it should have been. CAL could have quadrupled the ERW amount and they would not have gotten even half as many MORE participants. It's unfortunate, but true. The ones who stayed won't be ready no matter what. Doing anything for them would simply be throwing good money after bad. CAL understood it, CALALPA needs to do the same.

I needed to make that MORE clear.

 

[luckytohaveajob]

Mesa....really? Wow, I did not know Mesa would fly me 2 trips this year so far and pay me $16k for it..

Quote right out of the NY Times article posted in this thread:

"Continental, along with a small number of regional airlines and a caterer, will also be able to take advantage of the provision."

The NY Times is even comparing CAL to regional airlines. Or do you think the cafeteria worker comparison is more flattering? Do you wear a hair net with your white shoes and polyester dress with your plastic gloves on?

And the only reason you could have possibly worked two trips and gotten paid is burning your sick time. You don't have duty rigs allowing you get a full guarantee while flying less than the hard time flown. You can not maximize a vacation week into anything more than a week. And sitting reserve and not being flown is not time off.

So get a new pair of plastic gloves, change your hair net, and wipe off the mash potatoes on your smock, you MESA major wanna bee.

 

[thor2j]

Quote right out of the NY Times article posted in this thread:

"Continental, along with a small number of regional airlines and a caterer, will also be able to take advantage of the provision."

The NY Times is even comparing CAL to regional airlines. Or do you think the cafeteria worker comparison is more flattering? Do you wear a hair net with your white shoes and polyester dress with your plastic gloves on?

And the only reason you could have possibly worked two trips and gotten paid is burning your sick time. You don't have duty rigs allowing you get a full guarantee while flying less than the hard time flown. You can not maximize a vacation week into anything more than a week. And sitting reserve and not being flown is not time off.

So get a new pair of plastic gloves, change your hair net, and wipe off the mash potatoes on your smock, you MESA major wanna bee.

Um , yes it still sucks, but last I checked CALs payrates from year 5+ are as high if not higher then most legacy carriers.

Secondly, if you live in base and never get called for reserve it is like having time off, especially if you have a 9 hour call out.

 

[Ex737Driver]

.......... The religious fanatics are finally out of power.

Alas, it is true. And with them go the last vestiges of a once great nation. Human secularism.....what a way to go!

 

[SFR]

Quote right out of the NY Times article posted in this thread:

"Continental, along with a small number of regional airlines and a caterer, will also be able to take advantage of the provision."

The NY Times is even comparing CAL to regional airlines. Or do you think the cafeteria worker comparison is more flattering? Do you wear a hair net with your white shoes and polyester dress with your plastic gloves on?

And the only reason you could have possibly worked two trips and gotten paid is burning your sick time. You don't have duty rigs allowing you get a full guarantee while flying less than the hard time flown. You can not maximize a vacation week into anything more than a week. And sitting reserve and not being flown is not time off.

So get a new pair of plastic gloves, change your hair net, and wipe off the mash potatoes on your smock, you MESA major wanna bee.

Nope. Wrong again......I just bid reserve and they flew me 2 trips this year so far.... as of 2/24/09


So, try again please.....

 

[luckytohaveajob]

Nope. Wrong again......I just bid reserve and they flew me 2 trips this year so far.... as of 2/24/09


So, try again please.....

No, I did get it. Reserve is not time off. Ask those sitting reserve in a crash pad if they feel like they have time off? Ask those sitting reserve with a commute if they have time off watching the weather and the flights?

It is not you SFR. It is the entire CAL pilot group who doesn't get it. Don't take it personal SFR. It's CAL.

But the main point is CAL is the MESA of majors. And CAL pilots like licking Larry's boots and would do the same if Jonathon Ornstein was the next CEO as well.

A contract is not based on FAR's. And it isn't worth anything if it only pays you for what you do. Hard time is not the measure of your worth. Everyday you stand in a security line, preflight and aircraft, check the weather, deal with maintenance, get to spend three hours in the crew room, go to training, and don't get paid, you are leaving money on the table.

This pension issue is simply the wipe saw which is going to reduce those 5+ year pay rates down to the other legacies to be competitive.

So how are those less than 5+ pay rates? How are your work rules? How is training? How is your scheduling section? I know. Just like MESA's.