New TA?

Discuss topics relating to Air Canada.

Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog

mbav8r
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2325
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2006 8:11 am
Location: Manitoba

Re: New TA?

Post by mbav8r »

Yes, however my comment was more to do with overfunding, there are no "company" contribution holidays when overfunded. There is no maximum amount of overfunding, so the company will continue to contribute regardless. That, combined with the need to recover in an underfunded situation is the best of both worlds but again if it's performing well and significantly overfunded, if and when a market correction occurs, the onus on the company will be greatly reduced. In my view a win for the company and employee, this of course is an opinion of someone who is not in either plan and has not looked at the revenue Canada's literature on them.
---------- ADS -----------
 
rudder
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3848
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:10 pm

Re: New TA?

Post by rudder »

Fair enough. But currently, what percentage of DB plans are underfunded? Lots. MEPP is not a panacea for low interest rates or stagnant investment returns.

MEPP with a formula based benefit is a step up from DC but it still places a level of uncertainty on the plan member.
---------- ADS -----------
 
aV1aTOr
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 163
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 2:15 pm

Re: New TA?

Post by aV1aTOr »

Fanblade wrote:
aV1aTOr wrote:
Fanblade wrote:Excellent DC pension traded for Rouge growth.
Spoken like a true DBer.
?

My comment wasn't meant to be sarcastic or negative. So why the shot?

Yes I am a DBer. I voted yes to this agreement because as Rudder put it, it needed to get fixed.

Your welcome.

FWIW I get the response considering the vocal "what's in it for me crowd".

So cheers!
I think the sarcasm I read from you was actually confused. The number of DB guys who seemingly have zero understanding of the MEPP and speak so highly of the DC plan is exhausting. I thought you inferred that the existing DC plan was excellent (not the MEPP that we gained). I heard so many times from DB guys about how many DC guys love the DC pension. So you're correct, feeling a tad jaded over here by the vocal "there's nothing for me" crowd. I would ask that crowd as well, what pension gains were in the 2014 contract for the DC crowd? Oh yes, MPU increases. So that entitlement goes both ways.
In the end, with this behind us, here's hoping we are all pulling in the same direction in 2020 for real material gains for everyone, and inching closer to bringing LOU74 in line with ML WAWCONs.
Cheers.
---------- ADS -----------
 
mbav8r
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2325
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2006 8:11 am
Location: Manitoba

Re: New TA?

Post by mbav8r »

Why are the DBs currently underfunded, my guess partly to do with the level of funding prior to a market correction. I get that it puts the risk on the participants but it does fix some of the short comings of DB plans.
Could we agree, this is the next best thing to a DB plan, which are all but going extinct?
I don't know who is going to manage this fund but if it's the same as ACs DB, it should do well.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Jimmy_Hoffa
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 124
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 2:46 pm

Re: New TA?

Post by Jimmy_Hoffa »

aV1aTOr wrote:
I think the sarcasm I read from you was actually confused. The number of DB guys who seemingly have zero understanding of the MEPP and speak so highly of the DC plan is exhausting. I thought you inferred that the existing DC plan was excellent (not the MEPP that we gained). I heard so many times from DB guys about how many DC guys love the DC pension. So you're correct, feeling a tad jaded over here by the vocal "there's nothing for me" crowd. I would ask that crowd as well, what pension gains were in the 2014 contract for the DC crowd? Oh yes, MPU increases. So that entitlement goes both ways.
Here is the biggest misconception going into these negotiations. In 2014 federal legislation prevented the company from making any changes to the existing DC plan. There was nothing that could have been done to improve it. Period.
---------- ADS -----------
 
altiplano
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5377
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:24 pm

Re: New TA?

Post by altiplano »

mbav8r wrote:Why are the DBs currently underfunded, my guess partly to do with the level of funding prior to a market correction. I get that it puts the risk on the participants but it does fix some of the short comings of DB plans.
Could we agree, this is the next best thing to a DB plan, which are all but going extinct?
I don't know who is going to manage this fund but if it's the same as ACs DB, it should do well.
The thing with underfunding/overfunding of DBs is it is only an actuarial calculation looking at worst case scenario and not taking into account regular market cycles.

Flaherty exempted AC from making up the $billion underfunding in 2013 because he recognised that... 18 mos later they were $billion surplus. now they are multi-billion surplus and we're still paying through the teeth.

Under/over is not AC's issue anymore with TBP and it isn't the same management as the DB plans.

http://ccwipp.ca/index.php/en/

AC has washed their hands of any obligations in this deal beyond the contribution - everything is on the individual now.

If it was me I would have wanted a fully company paid DC plan with a better selection than just Manulife canned funds.
Keep all my money every month and have a maxed RRSP... push for a SERP in 2020/2023 that would be a killer arrangement.
Second choice would have been a hybrid DC/DB like many of our colleagues and comparators have.

Arbitration would have delivered something like that without the mass b-scale increases we are going to see.

This TBP won't cost AC much more. We certainly overpaid.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Jimmy_Hoffa
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 124
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 2:46 pm

Re: New TA?

Post by Jimmy_Hoffa »

altiplano wrote:
mbav8r wrote:Why are the DBs currently underfunded, my guess partly to do with the level of funding prior to a market correction. I get that it puts the risk on the participants but it does fix some of the short comings of DB plans.
Could we agree, this is the next best thing to a DB plan, which are all but going extinct?
I don't know who is going to manage this fund but if it's the same as ACs DB, it should do well.
The thing with underfunding/overfunding of DBs is it is only an actuarial calculation looking at worst case scenario and not taking into account regular market cycles.

Flaherty exempted AC from making up the $billion underfunding in 2013 because he recognised that... 18 mos later they were $billion surplus. now they are multi-billion surplus and we're still paying through the teeth.

Under/over is not AC's issue anymore with TBP and it isn't the same management as the DB plans.

http://ccwipp.ca/index.php/en/

AC has washed their hands of any obligations in this deal beyond the contribution - everything is on the individual now.

If it was me I would have wanted a fully company paid DC plan with a better selection than just Manulife canned funds.
Keep all my money every month and have a maxed RRSP... push for a SERP in 2020/2023 that would be a killer arrangement.
Second choice would have been a hybrid DC/DB like many of our colleagues and comparators have.

Arbitration would have delivered something like that without the mass b-scale increases we are going to see.

This TBP won't cost AC much more. We certainly overpaid.
Don't forget the nice little veto that AC has in there. Next down turn they can just roll it up and go back to the old DC plan the minute they feel like it.
---------- ADS -----------
 
groundpilot
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 295
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2004 10:10 am
Location: A Smokn' Hole

Re: New TA?

Post by groundpilot »

So much misinformation and opinions out there. People complain that the union publishes propaganda to push through their TA but yet these mysterious anonymous cards and "fact sheets" riddled with inaccuracies are ok.

At least the union puts names on their releases. They are held accountable.

The pension committee put a lot of effort into coming up with the MEPP. Altiplano...your post is riddled with contradictions

You state that the AC washed their hands on this and everything is on the individual but then state you want a DC with a SERP??

So now you have a plan where all of the risk is on the member, with a SERP the company could take away with concessions. With the MEPP, the company can't touch it. Good arm chair quarterback throw but I think it was intercepted
---------- ADS -----------
 
altiplano
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5377
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:24 pm

Re: New TA?

Post by altiplano »

Absolutely Jimmy...

Appendix G has a bunch of little treats buried.
aV1aTOr wrote:I'm guessing about 30 seconds of research was given to whether it was an improvement or not
Did you read appendix G (MOA 1)?

I think a lot of DC guys put in about 30 seconds of research on this also... just figured they won a gain. I bet most don't know what where the MOA that governs this is.

And don't realising their contribution will increase 25% after year 2 from the previous 6%, even on earnings below ITA limits, that means less take home in the leanest years.

Company contributions are proportionally lower... and only exceed current amounts until well above ITA contribution limits.

And yes, AC has an opt out clause to put you back on a DC plan if it warrants conditions have changed and require it. Could you imagine after we paid so much to get this?

I also wonder if anyone actually researched cwipp and similar plans beyond what ACPA told them?

Benefit cuts, contribution raises, plan costs... there is a lot of exposure there.

Anyway, if it's what you want, I'm glad, because we paid a fricking lot for it... that will cost 2/3 of us here now and everyone to come a lot. We will all work more for less.
---------- ADS -----------
 
altiplano
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5377
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:24 pm

Re: New TA?

Post by altiplano »

groundpilot wrote: Altiplano...your post is riddled with contradictions

You state that the AC washed their hands on this and everything is on the individual but then state you want a DC with a SERP??

So now you have a plan where all of the risk is on the member, with a SERP the company could take away with concessions. With the MEPP, the company can't touch it. Good arm chair quarterback throw but I think it was intercepted
Where is the contradiction?

I don't think you understand me.

1) AC did clearly wash their hands of this with the TBP.
Do you disagree?

2) DC plans AC can't touch the funding in.
Do you disagree?

3) SERP is a great way to top up an ITA limited DC pension.
Do you disagree?

We were sold one alternative to the DC and paid dearly for it.

I would rather have:

a fully funded DC pension, paid in full by my employer, to ITA limits
than:
a TBP I pay 7.5% of all my pretax earnings for.

And not have made any it minimal concessions...

I would have rather have gone after further improvements in the form of a SERP. Which while contractually exposed, is mitigated by the core protected DC holdings and hopefully the extra money you had year in, year out because you didn't have to pay 7.5 % for your pension.

For that matter:

I would rather have:

a fully funded DC pension, paid in full by my employer, to ITA limits, with a SERP
than:
a non-indexed DB that I pay 7.5% of most of my pretax earnings for.

Bottom line is, whether DC/TBP or DB we pay a ton for our pensions. I'd rather keep my money today and take a reasonably robust plan paid for entirely by my employer for my entire career.

The union tells us that guys aren't saving money themselves, aren't managing their DC well and are blowing through their cheques. Not my problem. Take some personal responsibility. I'd rather have money in my pocket today and not make any career concessions. Too late, but that's where I'm coming from anyway. I don't think there are any contradictions there.
---------- ADS -----------
 
navajo_jay
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 166
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 7:07 pm
Location: YUL

Re: New TA?

Post by navajo_jay »

Why are you guys fighting so much over pension when the real issue to me is depreciation of working conditions and schedule. We should work less and make the same money. We should improve working conditions for the now while we are young and healthy. The way it goes you guys won't need the pension because you won't probably be alive, since the life expectancy of an airline pilot pilot shorter than the general population.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Inverted2
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3692
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 7:46 am
Location: Turdistan

Re: New TA?

Post by Inverted2 »

The new TC duty time limits if the ever come into effect will mean everyone except the long haul guys will be working more days due to shorter duty days.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Let’s Go Brandon
altiplano
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5377
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:24 pm

Re: New TA?

Post by altiplano »

navajo_jay wrote:Why are you guys fighting so much over pension when the real issue to me is depreciation of working conditions and schedule. We should work less and make the same money.
As I said...
altiplano wrote:I'd rather have money in my pocket today and not make any career concessions.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Chris
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 116
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 1:07 pm
Location: Canada

Re: New TA?

Post by Chris »

Come join the management side.....

~ 6% & 6% DC Pension

~ 50+ hr work week (and weekends)

~ Constant travel (back of the bus middle seat 85% of the time)

~ Avg 2% annual salary increase
---------- ADS -----------
 
Alcoholism
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 167
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2017 3:51 pm

Re: New TA?

Post by Alcoholism »

You know what is sad? That ACPA and the AC pilots have such leverage, and they don't even know it! I thought HR recruited the best and brightest degree bearing turds. And here you SOBs give away more for less. WTF is going on there? Kool aid much? Not only do you have sway at your own company, but what happens in aviation in Canada. But you all are so dim to realize that. Fudge, if I could only swat you all over the head.... AC pilots loosing respect more and more each day... RIP
---------- ADS -----------
 
DH772
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 188
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 2:05 pm

Re: New TA?

Post by DH772 »

When you say "In fact if you look at the pension estimator if you take the additional payments made through the MEPP plan vs. DC and you factor that additional payment into the DC plan (say into a separate investment vehicle) the difference between the 2 plans is near 0."

You are making assumptions based on market returns and who knows how you came up with those numbers. DC members have to take on the risk. This was about the management of risk. This plan is pretty good, particularly when you compare it to other corporations.

"Let me ask you, how do MEPP members ask for increased pension in the future?"

The answer is pretty simple, you increase salary. Then that increases contributions.

In reference to DC pension - "not to mention that money is your forever."

So is the MEPP. The company can't touch it through concessions. And the DC contributions are still in a locked in RRSP with all the CRA restrictions.

I'm making assumptions?? First off, the whole premise of determining a DC pension involves assumptions? Not to mention the pension estimator uses just that....assumptions. (ex. 91 hours per month in some positions? Seriously?).
Secondly, I made zero assumptions. I am using the information the ACPA provided use via the pension estimator as to how much extra money is contributed over the DC plan.
I am not even accounting for the compounding interest, but rather just the extra contribution amounts since there will also be tax implications. So my "assumptions" are based on what ACPA is providing us.

Salary increases? Are you joking???
Take a look at the estimator. Even if you bid lower paying positions vs significantly higher paying positions the difference in your pension is hardly significant (Im assuming the pension estimator already took a 2% salary increase into account. Id take a look but ACPA already took the link for the estimator off their website). Taking into account our track record for salary gains over the last 20 years that certainly is a piss poor way of saying we'll get pension increases in the future via salary increases.

My reference to the money is yours forever means, when I die my spouse doesn't get reduced to 60%. When I die, she keeps 100% of the remainder, and after that it is paid forward to my children.

Whether you like the plan or not, it certainly is a step in the right direction for closing the pension gap. However, we are FAR off from equal pensions still.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Dockjock
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1045
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 1:46 pm
Location: south saturn delta

Re: New TA?

Post by Dockjock »

My bargaining position on pensions esp DB is I believe somebody- either the company or a bitter, ignorant faction of DCer's- is going to try to take it away. So I am only interested in improvements that result in money now, not later. The pensions are not equal no, but we just spent our entire wad on improving the DC plan to something at least twice as good as it was. Not to put too fine a point on it but...other than the 100 or so pilots in the pool when the pension changed, everyone else after that had the "deal breaker" choice to turn down the job if the offer wasn't to your liking. That's a fact. FWIW I'm not sure I feel any more secure with DB than I would with MEPP (or whatever it's called). Like I said, I feel that for better or worse the DB plan has a bullseye on it and will forevermore.
---------- ADS -----------
 
groundpilot
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 295
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2004 10:10 am
Location: A Smokn' Hole

Re: New TA?

Post by groundpilot »

Dockjock wrote:My bargaining position on pensions esp DB is I believe somebody- either the company or a bitter, ignorant faction of DCer's- is going to try to take it away. So I am only interested in improvements that result in money now, not later. The pensions are not equal no, but we just spent our entire wad on improving the DC plan to something at least twice as good as it was. Not to put too fine a point on it but...other than the 100 or so pilots in the pool when the pension changed, everyone else after that had the "deal breaker" choice to turn down the job if the offer wasn't to your liking. That's a fact. FWIW I'm not sure I feel any more secure with DB than I would with MEPP (or whatever it's called). Like I said, I feel that for better or worse the DB plan has a bullseye on it and will forevermore.
Love this post

This folks will always be the challenges a pilot union faces. It's not hard to divide and conquer when you got guys like this unable to look past their own nose.

ME ME ME

The other issue here is the lack of knowledge. Obviously you have formed your opinion without reading the material.

For one thing, a MEPP cannot be touched with concessions, unlike your DB & SERP

I hope you enjoyed the progression the age 60 rule gave and how it suddenly changed. But I'm sure things that changed to your benefit weren't an issue.
---------- ADS -----------
 
altiplano
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5377
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:24 pm

Re: New TA?

Post by altiplano »

groundpilot wrote:
Dockjock wrote:My bargaining position on pensions esp DB is I believe somebody- either the company or a bitter, ignorant faction of DCer's- is going to try to take it away. So I am only interested in improvements that result in money now, not later. The pensions are not equal no, but we just spent our entire wad on improving the DC plan to something at least twice as good as it was. Not to put too fine a point on it but...other than the 100 or so pilots in the pool when the pension changed, everyone else after that had the "deal breaker" choice to turn down the job if the offer wasn't to your liking. That's a fact. FWIW I'm not sure I feel any more secure with DB than I would with MEPP (or whatever it's called). Like I said, I feel that for better or worse the DB plan has a bullseye on it and will forevermore.
Love this post

This folks will always be the challenges a pilot union faces. It's not hard to divide and conquer when you got guys like this unable to look past their own nose.

ME ME ME

The other issue here is the lack of knowledge. Obviously you have formed your opinion without reading the material.

For one thing, a MEPP cannot be touched with concessions, unlike your DB & SERP

I hope you enjoyed the progression the age 60 rule gave and how it suddenly changed. But I'm sure things that changed to your benefit weren't an issue.
ME ME ME?

In that he maybe wants to keep his DB pension? But doesn't feel too secure in it? The pension he joined AC with and has paid dearly into his entire career and has based his future on?

Seriously, it seems you're challenged on understanding what he was saying.

You might not be familiar that the MEPP can absolutely be "touched".

I thought you read the material?

It's written in black and white in the new contract. Did you read that? Or just the ACPA slides?

AC can unilaterally withaw from cwipp and place pilots back on a DC plan if conditions change. I'm not sure why we gave so much just to have an opt out clause for the corporation...

The company does not have an opt out clause on the DB pension. It's in our contract, but it can be negotiated away - like KV and friends tried in 2011 - only to have it voted down by the guys you seem to have so much disdain for... and then the Feds took it anyway.

Your ill will and resentment is misdirected.

Why are you carrying on about age 60 anyway?
---------- ADS -----------
 
groundpilot
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 295
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2004 10:10 am
Location: A Smokn' Hole

Re: New TA?

Post by groundpilot »

Yes I read the MOA, and it's purpose is that AC must still contribute to an interim DC if there are regulatory changes. It's there to protect us from AC avoiding contributions.

All the contributions up to that point are in the multi employer pension plan and AC isn't touching it...

The new plan isn't perfect but it's prob our best option as the DB isn't coming back.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “Air Canada”