FedEx and Pilots reach TA !!!!

[FoxHunter]

Once again, people caring only about themselves. That high B fund is great, IF you have a long ways to go, and IF your investment choices did well (a bigger "if" than you might think!). Yeah, let's reduce it to the UPS mix, THAT would be fair to those 50 and up, right? True colors showing here, I think. ME ME ME!

Everyone looks at the issue from where they sit, just human nature. If we were stupid enough to change the A plan to 1% like UPS in return for a 12% B fund contribution it would in fact have little effect on the older guys since you would not lose the years x 2% only the future years, which are few. The junior, young guys would be shooting themselves in the foot. I suggest they speak to some experts on pensions and they will find out that this extra 5% is worth only a fraction of the 1% per year that they think will be wise to give up in return for the increased B fund. Then is you add the fact that you would be restricted by the 415(c) limits it only gets worse.:crying:

 

[Purpled]

Once again, people caring only about themselves. That high B fund is great, IF you have a long ways to go, and IF your investment choices did well (a bigger "if" than you might think!). Yeah, let's reduce it to the UPS mix, THAT would be fair to those 50 and up, right? True colors showing here, I think. ME ME ME!

Whoaaa, nobody here...that I can see...has suggested getting rid of your due compensation. If such a transition from bit 'A' plan to big 'B' plan were to happen, it wouldn't without due compensation to the senior/older guys.

 

[Purpled]

Everyone looks at the issue from where they sit, just human nature. If we were stupid enough to change the A plan to 1% like UPS in return for a 12% B fund contribution it would in fact have little effect on the older guys since you would not lose the years x 2% only the future years, which are few. The junior, young guys would be shooting themselves in the foot. I suggest they speak to some experts on pensions and they will find out that this extra 5% is worth only a fraction of the 1% per year that they think will be wise to give up in return for the increased B fund. Then is you add the fact that you would be restricted by the 415(c) limits it only gets worse.:crying:

Fox,

You are absolutely correct that the A fund is a much better deal than the B fund, even if the B fund were enhanced. The problem is that so many A plans have disappeared recently that folks are coming to realize that a bird in the hand is worth...well you know. If you calculate the value of your A plan over your expected lifetime to be X dollars, you'd be a fool to pass up a check for X/2 at retirement.

Fred himself said that most companies would be dumping the A plan in the future, and I have little confidence that it will still be around 10 years from now, much less 25 or 35. I'm not sure how the new pension reform will help us out, but I have high confidence that the companies will find a way around it.

You seem like a pretty savvy guy financially, but I think you've got your blinders on here to the real possibilities of what could happen to our(your) retirement. I hope not, since it's just about the best thing I've seen in the business world for labor, but I'm just not convinced.

 

[Laughing_Jakal]

Waste of time

Like mission planning without all the details.....plan early, plan often.

Be patient and let everything come out in the wash.

You guys suffer from premature ejac..er...calculation syndrome.

 

[skykid]

Fred himself said that most companies would be dumping the A plan in the future, and I have little confidence that it will still be around 10 years from now, much less 25 or 35. I'm not sure how the new pension reform will help us out, but I have high confidence that the companies will find a way around it.

Absolutely. I calculate my A plan to pay out exactly zero in 20 or so years when I retire. If I was within a few years, I would maybe count on the minimum that the PBGC pays out when they take over a companies plan. I would much rather have a bigger B plan that I can have control over.

 

[SNIZ]

Agreed

How about we read the TA, listen to the road shows and vote accordingly.

Our table position on the B Plan was 8%, WSJ says we got 7%. Our table position was the DOS pay raise was 8%, WSJ says we got 9%. Sounds like there was some negotiating going on......

 

[TheBaron]

The negotiating committee letter posted on the FDX/ALPA website confirmed the pay rate figures leaked to the WSJ but didn't give any more details. I'm just wondering where "pay for the delay" comes into play. If our pay raises are pretty much in line with our table position and our four cornerstone issues were "effectively addressed", great...but unless there is some serious retro pay I would say the company won. Hopefully the TA will prove otherwise.

 

[Osmosis]

Once again, people caring only about themselves. That high B fund is great, IF you have a long ways to go, and IF your investment choices did well (a bigger "if" than you might think!). Yeah, let's reduce it to the UPS mix, THAT would be fair to those 50 and up, right? True colors showing here, I think. ME ME ME!

Ptarmigan, I couldn't help but respond to this. At our New Hire Union Welcome last June, the Union leaders specifically addressed the A/B Fund issue to us. What their long term plan was to reduce our reliance on the A Fund, knowing that it might not be there down the road. How they explained it was they were trying to raise the B Fund by 2-4 percent each contract over time, and reduce the A Fund a bit each time. This way eventually our retirement reliance would be more on the B Fund. They said they planned small steps, so that no part of the crew force was hit hard. But, it takes the over 50 guys as you mentioned, to reduce their reliance of the A Fund... just a bit, to secure the future crew force a retirement as well. Everyone has to give and take, and not just think about me, me, me. Hence why we are a Union.

Anyway, I agree with most here of let's wait and see what the TA is before we get all ruffled. Our negotiating team has been working way too long and hard to give us a contract that we won't be happy with. Of course individually there may be things in it that are not what fits your individual plans. I would expect nothing short of a contract that addresses the collective needs.

 

[Aviator7576]

B plan

Past V1...

Current IRS limits for 2006 is 220k...limits for 2007 not announced yet.

JTF

Aviator7576

 

[ptarmigan]

Fox,

You are absolutely correct that the A fund is a much better deal than the B fund, even if the B fund were enhanced. The problem is that so many A plans have disappeared recently that folks are coming to realize that a bird in the hand is worth...well you know. If you calculate the value of your A plan over your expected lifetime to be X dollars, you'd be a fool to pass up a check for X/2 at retirement.

Fred himself said that most companies would be dumping the A plan in the future, and I have little confidence that it will still be around 10 years from now, much less 25 or 35. I'm not sure how the new pension reform will help us out, but I have high confidence that the companies will find a way around it.

You seem like a pretty savvy guy financially, but I think you've got your blinders on here to the real possibilities of what could happen to our(your) retirement. I hope not, since it's just about the best thing I've seen in the business world for labor, but I'm just not convinced.

Lots of very well spoken, measured responses on this last page!

As for the "pension reform", people need to read that language. That didn't help us, at FedEx, one bit, in fact, from what I have been told from those that understand this stuff, it allows the company to legally underfund our pension. That is great if you are already underfunded, like the pax guys, as it prevents them from having to dissolve it or something, but sucks for us! Hopefully someone here can explain this all better, but I do not see that reform as being a good thing for those at strong companies.

 

[PastV1]

7576,

Thanks for the correction. Must have misread it regs. They are so easy to comprehend!

Past....

 

[LivinDaDream]

Ptarmigan,

There really isn't anything worse in the pension reform. But, there are some positives.

The reason that so many companies have been able to get out of the pension obligations so easily is due to the short repayment terms that put huge cash crunches on these companies. When hard times hit, they could not afford to make the payments and it wasn't hard to convince a judge of this. The new changes allow more flexibility to lower the cash payments by allowing more time to catch up on deficits. This will hopefully make it harder for them to make a legitimate claim in bankruptcy going forward.

I would have liked to have seen them also get the ability to overfund to a much higher level to ease the burden when bad times hit. The current rules suck because, especially in the passenger world, when the economy tanks so does the return on pension balances. At the same time that the pension balances are decreasing, the companies making the payments are taking a financial hit. If they could pad these accounts to a higher level when times are good, it might ease the pain. The best defense is a good offense.

Having said all this, I agree with most that this is all just a band aid. I don't count on my pension being there in 20 years, and will be happily surprised if it is.

 

[Aviator7576]

B plan

Past V1...

Yeah...the IRS rules and regulations are soooooo user friendly..I rely on our union experts to tell us what the limits and rules are starting each year. Just so you know, 401k + B plan contributions cannot exceed that magic number (44k for 2006). This number (along with the 220k) has been going up every year, so our "experts" expect it to kind of dovetail with our pay increases here at big brown.

YMMV

Aviator7576

 

[PastV1]

Aviator7576,

As it stands now at FDX, the highest pay rate will not max out the B Plan if the person only fly's the line with no extra. Hopefully that will change with the TA...

Past...

 

[Aviator7576]

B plan

Past...

What our retirement guys tried to do was to keep it at the limit. Our minimum guarantee under the TA is $217,961 without perdiem/sick buyback/extra flying/premiums. This way we hope to ride as near the edge of the limits so every capt will have the full 12% on guarantee and the fo/fe bubbas will have everything they earn counted as a part of it. Federal limits on the 401k (not sure if you guys have that or not) was 15k this past year...not sure if it's going up or not for next year. The dilemma with 7% is that the most you can have the company pay in to a B plan is $15,400 (7% X 220k). But you guys have a much better A plan. I prefer to have most of my money available to me ( or my heirs) rather than lose most of it by keeling over two days after retirement after flying night freight for so many years.

YMMV

Aviator7576