Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Jim: Did having no income, no medical, and no social security surprise you? Were you caught off guard? You have been in control of this for some time now. If it looked like SWA was not going to provide you with what you needed to retire with you should have negotiated better wages! How many contracts have you been through? You should have addressed this in at least one of them. Or, since you are so darn great, why didn't you take you talents elsewhere? Been a brain surgeon or something?
I have a flightplan for retirement, I want to fly that plan. (BTW, mine has to include NEVER getting any SS) That means you go at 60, and I go at 60. Five more years as costar for me doesn't really help, I just work longer.
Bah ha ha ha ha! If you had brought this up pre-9/11 you would have been crucified by all the people begging for change now (minus LCCs). This is purely about money. I don't hold it against them, I'd be doing the same thing also if I had a family (2 ex's, Bimmer payment, giant mortgage, boat payment) to support. I want it to stay, b/c of my family, whom I plan on spending a lot of time with when I retire at 55. To each his own.BureaucraticI really don't think this is about economics, but rather if the original rule was proper to begin with.
Jim Smyth said:Nope, no surprises at all. Been planning on retirement since I was in my mid to upper twenties when I started my IRA's. I had very wise parents with old school values to learn from.
SWA has a formula where you can turn in part of your sick bank that you accumulated to receive medical benefits until you reach age 65. In our last contract extension they gave us the option to also use those sick trips to bring your wife along for the ride too. My wife is 7 years younger than me so I need alot of sick trips. I should have enough sick trips for me and the wife to go to age 65 medically through SWA in 2 years with what I have accumulated already. Now with that being said what if I get hurt down the road and cant work for a year while out on a medical? I would have to use all my sick trips up and then at age 60 would have nothing left. So then I would have no medical insurance after age 60 and would have a hard time getting it if needed. Thats my big concern. If I have the option to go to 65 then this is a non issue because I will have insurance until 65 and have to just worry about the wife after that.
I have been through 1 contract at SWA. It has lasted 11 years now ( 2 extensions) and has 1 more year to go. They did make improvments to our medical after retirement and also made improvements to our compensation. Since I am assuming that money wont be the big issue this time around (section 6 next year) with whats going on in the industry we may close up a few of those loop holes that we currently have in our contract, medical issues being one of them.
I am actualy not that smart. I am a Average "C" type of a guy is all. But I do have alot of common sense. I am well prepared for retirement at age 60. Going to age 65 would just be a bonus as far as not worring about medical coverage (current conditions) or tapping the retirement nest egg. If in our next contract SWA and SWAPA changes the medical issue for us, I may be retiring earlier than 60. Like I said before, security,rude hotel guests,check rides etc get pretty old after a while.
You are wise to not plan on Socail Security because if you are young it may not be there when you are old. It also may not be there for me or if it is I am assuming it will be a greatly reduced rate especially if you have money saved already. Planning this all out when your young is deffinately the way to go.
Jim Smyth said:Ya, your right. I'm done.
capt_zman said:Spooky, please spare us with your condascending know-it-all attitude. Not all of us "young guys" are young and dumb.
As always, it comes down to the have and have nots. From my point of view, the age 65 thing is a credible threat to not just an upgrade, but to my job. What happens to me and my family? Do I join the list of furloughed guys from (pick an airline) too?
It's pretty obvious that labor costs, whether right or wrong, is a focal point at every airline right now. If we add 5 more years to the top wage scale of the cost structure, what are the consequences in doing so? Let's look a simple cost analysis at my airline regarding retirements at 60 vs. 65:
5 year retirement outlook:
2005 = 69
2006 = 148
2007 = 159
2008 = 155
2009 = 134
Total = 665
Let's assume that 80% are widebody captains (WC) and 20% are narrow body captains (NC). We'll also assume that each captain has a 75 hr per month guarantee. 665 * .80 = 532 WC and 133 NC. We'll also assume that each captain is at the 15 year top of pay scale, so each WC currently makes $206.24 /hr and NC $177.78 /hr.
((75 hrs*206.24)*12 mos)*532 = $98,747,712 per year in salary.
((75 hrs*177.78)*12 mos)*133 = $21,280,266 per year in salary.
So each year it costs my airline $120,027,978 extra in labor costs, which would equate to $600,139,890 over a 5 year period. Also notice that this is just salary, not including insurance, medical costs, or anything else for that matter.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that even the most profitable airlines will have a difficult time swallowing an extra $120 million in costs per year and over $600 million over 5 years, especially since these costs currently aren't budgeted. It also doesn't take much intelligence to figure out exactly where the company will seek relief for such costs, just ask some of the other airlines.
So while you and spooky go out and "hit some balls" and not worry about what's going to happen to anyone other than you, you can bet your last dollar that I'm going to exhaust every possible option to make sure this doesn't happen. The airline industry has been victimized by mismanagement for decades, let's not aid in flipping the switch on the rest of the us.