New TA?

Discuss topics relating to Air Canada.

Moderators: ahramin, sky's the limit, Sulako, North Shore

Message
Author
User avatar
navajo_jay
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 7:07 pm
Location: YUL

Re: New TA?

#51 Post by navajo_jay » Sat Sep 16, 2017 2:58 pm

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 -----------

User avatar
Inverted2
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1873
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 7:46 am
Location: Ontario

Re: New TA?

#52 Post by Inverted2 » Sat Sep 16, 2017 3:30 pm

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 -----------

altiplano
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2459
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:24 pm

Re: New TA?

#53 Post by altiplano » Sat Sep 16, 2017 5:45 pm

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: 112
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 1:07 pm
Location: Canada

Re: New TA?

#54 Post by Chris » Sat Sep 16, 2017 6:21 pm

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 1
Rank 1
Posts: 41
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2017 3:51 pm

Re: New TA?

#55 Post by Alcoholism » Sat Sep 16, 2017 7:43 pm

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?

#56 Post by DH772 » Sun Sep 17, 2017 7:47 am

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 8
Rank 8
Posts: 995
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 1:46 pm
Location: south saturn delta

Re: New TA?

#57 Post by Dockjock » Mon Sep 18, 2017 2:29 am

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 3
Rank 3
Posts: 196
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2004 10:10 am
Location: A Smokn' Hole

Re: New TA?

#58 Post by groundpilot » Mon Sep 18, 2017 8:56 am

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
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2459
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:24 pm

Re: New TA?

#59 Post by altiplano » Mon Sep 18, 2017 12:06 pm

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 3
Rank 3
Posts: 196
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2004 10:10 am
Location: A Smokn' Hole

Re: New TA?

#60 Post by groundpilot » Mon Sep 18, 2017 12:49 pm

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 -----------

Jimmy2
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 131
Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2015 6:50 am

Re: New TA?

#61 Post by Jimmy2 » Mon Sep 18, 2017 1:44 pm

What should one do if they only plan to stay at AC for a few years? Can you contribute to the pension plan and cash out when you leave? Or is there a minimum time you have to contribute before you can get anything out? What about opting out of it entirely?
---------- ADS -----------

altiplano
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2459
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:24 pm

Re: New TA?

#62 Post by altiplano » Mon Sep 18, 2017 2:12 pm

groundpilot wrote: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.
You said:

"MEPP cannot be touched without concessions"

and clearly that isn't true as you acknowledge it now.
They can wind it up and go back to a DC unilaterally on their determination.

I fail to see your point then?

DB cannot be touched either in that the money is mine, not the employers. It is protected by government pension legislation.

Further:

DB cannot be unilaterally terminated. It is in the contract.

If you think TBP is the best option for you, great, you have it now.

So let's get back to what dockjock said and focus on getting together and getting our take home pay today higher. You appear to be the one divided...

Higher pay today = higher pay on your TBP pension. More money saved outside your pension for your future and my future... Time to move past the division.... We certainly paid for it...
---------- ADS -----------

altiplano
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2459
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:24 pm

Re: New TA?

#63 Post by altiplano » Mon Sep 18, 2017 2:27 pm

I will also add.

With our DB in such a surplus, pilots still paying extra that was mandated when the pension was in deficit, corp on a never ending funding holiday, a near bulletproofed de-risk strategy, our extra contributions now going toward our own serp... The DB is on solid ground and costs the company nothing...

Make no mistake, we are paying for our own pensions... it's not some corporate gift.

It's the decisions by the guys back in ACPA leadership today - after being recalled in 2011 - that resulted in you not having DB too.

The big gain for the corporation is division.
DC/TBP costs them more than DB... but DIVISION IS PRICELESS...

We have to move forward now together as a group, keep everything we have and focus on membership-wide gains... not boutique targeted gains designed to achieve 53%...
---------- ADS -----------

groundpilot
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 196
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2004 10:10 am
Location: A Smokn' Hole

Re: New TA?

#64 Post by groundpilot » Mon Sep 18, 2017 3:55 pm

You can cash out the MEPP via a "transfer value" or defer the annuity to age 60 with no penalties.

Regulations could change for the MEPP, who knows as more employers grab onto the idea as it gets lots of income tax relief. Even if this were to happen, AC would still be on the hook for contributions.

Yes you paid into your DB pension, but the issue is that it is based on your best 5 years, so in theory a pilot could bid RP for 25 years and then be a B777 Captain for the last 5. He hardly paid his share with his contributions.

From what I understood, Your SERP is absolutely negotiable as it is based on company revenues, and thus could be subject to changes with concessions. With a MEPP it is locked away with a different organization, not sure how I else I can spell this out. AC can't touch it. If AC goes belly up, you don't have a SERP. But maybe I'm missing something here but this is what I was told.
---------- ADS -----------

altiplano
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2459
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:24 pm

Re: New TA?

#65 Post by altiplano » Mon Sep 18, 2017 4:49 pm

Everything is ultimately negotiable as far as what goes on into the future...

But the DB portion everyone has paid to this far is ours no matter what happens with the corporation or contract. Just like what you put into your DC/TBP.

Serp is paid by the company from general revenues, it's in our contract, they can't unilaterally take it away.
But now, with the DB is so far in surplus, extra payments go to funding and guaranteeing all or a portion of that serp - even if the company gets wound up.

As far as a 25 year RP career and last 5 WB capt... not a very common scenario... maybe it happens a few times... but it certainly isn't the norm... most guys will do plenty of years of high earning. But since it's a group plan that's the deal and it's insulated from anomalies like that. Just like the guys that live to 100 and the guys that die a year after retirement... It averages out... the actuaries have that figured... Most guys work hard and earn well and we pay a ton into our pension. Pre-pay group GFd RPs make pretty good money too... better than a 320 FO so they certainly pay a good chunk...

Anyway, I'm not sure why you're worried about who has paid their fair share in the DB plan. I'm not worried about it and it's my plan... and it hasn't ever been in such good shape.

DC guys going after DB guys in the future when they have a majority is a DFR... besides, here we've all made sacrifices to get you on a plan you obviously value as better than a DB.

So get with it and let's make some across the board gains for ALL ACPA pilots going forward - gains that will improve our QOL and earnings today and into the future.

Dwelling on differences that were forced on us - esp when we just made such a sacrifice to narrow/eliminate it - does nothing but continue to divide us.
---------- ADS -----------

groundpilot
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 196
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2004 10:10 am
Location: A Smokn' Hole

Re: New TA?

#66 Post by groundpilot » Mon Sep 18, 2017 6:36 pm

I would much much rather be on a DB but it wasn't an option...

I guess you take what you can get as the saying goes

The RP example was just an illustration of another reason why the company had zero interest in a DB. They want career progression, and with a lot of growth and retirements in the future, they are going to need it.
---------- ADS -----------

altiplano
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2459
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:24 pm

Re: New TA?

#67 Post by altiplano » Mon Sep 18, 2017 7:41 pm

groundpilot wrote:I would much much rather be on a DB but it wasn't an option...

I guess you take what you can get as the saying goes

The RP example was just an illustration of another reason why the company had zero interest in a DB. They want career progression, and with a lot of growth and retirements in the future, they are going to need it.
Maybe, but I'll say it again... DIVISION IS PRICELESS.

I wanted us all back on the DB that was illegally taken from us... but this ACPA leadership group won't pursue the case against C33... they won't stand up against their corporate masters... weak.

2 Status quo LEC chairs ACCLAIMED today... so it looks like it isn't going to move ahead... Hope for change in at least one of the remaining bases to vote...

Anyway... time to move forward. We overpaid for the TBP, but it's done, you see it as an improvement, great, now let's focus on improvements to get us ALL toward the levels of contract improvements our peers at other network and legacy airlines have seen in 2020.

More money and better life = better today and better retirement for me and all my AC brothers and sisters.

We get that by holding onto everything we have today. No more concessions or "offsets"...

That's all I care about moving forward. Period.
---------- ADS -----------

Dockjock
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 995
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 1:46 pm
Location: south saturn delta

Re: New TA?

#68 Post by Dockjock » Tue Sep 19, 2017 2:00 am

ME ME ME? You mean, how we just went an entire bargaining round and the main- really, only- major improvement is YOUR pension? Huh. It needed to be done, it would just be nice if people like you recognized what just happened. I know the history, so don't bother.
---------- ADS -----------

Jimmy_Hoffa
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 77
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 2:46 pm

Re: New TA?

#69 Post by Jimmy_Hoffa » Tue Sep 19, 2017 6:17 pm

.
---------- ADS -----------

Ah_yeah
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 103
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2011 4:50 pm

Re: New TA?

#70 Post by Ah_yeah » Wed Sep 20, 2017 7:04 am

groundpilot wrote:You can cash out the MEPP via a "transfer value" or defer the annuity to age 60 with no penalties.

Regulations could change for the MEPP, who knows as more employers grab onto the idea as it gets lots of income tax relief. Even if this were to happen, AC would still be on the hook for contributions.

Yes you paid into your DB pension, but the issue is that it is based on your best 5 years, so in theory a pilot could bid RP for 25 years and then be a B777 Captain for the last 5. He hardly paid his share with his contributions.

From what I understood, Your SERP is absolutely negotiable as it is based on company revenues, and thus could be subject to changes with concessions. With a MEPP it is locked away with a different organization, not sure how I else I can spell this out. AC can't touch it. If AC goes belly up, you don't have a SERP. But maybe I'm missing something here but this is what I was told.
Glad to hear this. This is your leverage going forward. If/When the market for pilots become critical in more hospitable parts of the world your experience will demand some serious coin. As a twenty year AC pilot, I give you one piece of advice : Never trust ACPA to look out for your career. In less than 10 years, you can have my seat but the way our union is handling things you'll probably have better opportunities elsewhere.
---------- ADS -----------

baily
Rank 0
Rank 0
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2017 7:41 pm

Re: New TA?

#71 Post by baily » Mon Oct 02, 2017 10:45 pm

i'm curious the new difference....

i obviously don't have access to the agreement so thought i'd ask


i understood the last dc .... match 6 percent to 100 between year 1-3 , 137 between year 3 and 5 and 175 percent after that.

obviously the structure has changed ....

but under the new agreement...let's just say after year 5.... for every dollar i put in....how much would the company match? what's the maximum?

and is it portable....ie i go fly somewhere else in 10 years i vest all the money?

is there a vesting period.?


and are you saying that with the DB pension the company is no longer paying into at all?

if they do pay into DB ....for every dollar someone puts in...how much does company add?

i know it's probably more complicated than that but even a ball park would be helpful.

thanks
---------- ADS -----------

aV1aTOr
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 132
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 2:15 pm

Re: New TA?

#72 Post by aV1aTOr » Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:57 am

Jimmy_Hoffa wrote:
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.
I understand that, as do most DCers. But that doesn't mean many felt that this time around it was our turn for a pension upgrade. Whether or not we were able to improve the DC pension in 2014, the fact is we didn't. So why are we labeled "entitled" for wanting it in this round? That I don't understand.
---------- ADS -----------

altiplano
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2459
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:24 pm

Re: New TA?

#73 Post by altiplano » Mon Oct 09, 2017 3:07 pm

aV1aTOr wrote: I understand that, as do most DCers. But that doesn't mean many felt that this time around it was our turn for a pension upgrade. Whether or not we were able to improve the DC pension in 2014, the fact is we didn't. So why are we labeled "entitled" for wanting it in this round? That I don't understand.
Everyone wanted a pension upgrade for the DC... As you acknowledge we were stuck in 2014... but the deal we made then (framework moa) also guaranteed incremental gains for the DC in the reopeners, on top of our 2014 negotiated agreement...

Despite that guarantee we threw down major concessions to buy the gains.

I'm glad you like the TBP, because we paid dearly for something that our own legal department acknowledged we would have had 50% chance of getting in arbitration this year and virtually 100% chance of getting in 2020...

The immediate cost of this plan is lower than what the current DC cost is. The cost of this plan over the next 7 years is only a few million over what the DC would have cost the company in the same period. Far below the incremental gains we had already agreed to moving forward...

Further the actual benefit - in terms of company contribution levels - is to very few had we needed to wait until 2020 to get it (ITA constraints)... and even then it's only a slight one... That's a trade-off, but a very small one - you'd have to be 320 Captain to be getting less of a contribution vs. DC...

You will be able to buy back your service with your contribution now with what you have put into DC and you would have been in 2020 also, if we had to wait...

The hurry to secure this particular MEPP and the lack of full disclosure by our association on dollar values of concessions vs. gains vs. what we could have got in arbitration is very telling.

The fact the NC walked out on the company's extreme asks only to be turned around to acquiesce to corporate demands by KV and MI is telling.

The shutdown of communications by our association so we couldn't only hear their sell job is telling.

The fact that our own senior executives are part of the she's job is telling.

The fact that they seek to marginalise, and belittle dissenters is telling.

The fact they have muzzled association committee members from speaking out is telling.

The fact some of our own MEC members were muzzled and threatened from speaking out is telling.

The fact the guys giving up the farm here are the same guys that negotiated away the DB for you on 2011 is telling.

The fact these guys won't go after C33, despite everyone else winning similar challenges is telling.

What an association...

Anyway - water under the bridge now...

I'm glad you have pension that you can appreciate now, and I hope we can all move forward together now that this battle is behind us and agree that we need to start building onto what is left - particularly on scope - and making gains in 2020, 2023, 2024...

We have more in common than difference Black/Red DB/TBP - No more targeted gains to get 53% Yes votes... All boats need to rise together.
---------- ADS -----------

aV1aTOr
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 132
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 2:15 pm

Re: New TA?

#74 Post by aV1aTOr » Tue Oct 10, 2017 10:22 am

altiplano wrote:
aV1aTOr wrote: I understand that, as do most DCers. But that doesn't mean many felt that this time around it was our turn for a pension upgrade. Whether or not we were able to improve the DC pension in 2014, the fact is we didn't. So why are we labeled "entitled" for wanting it in this round? That I don't understand.
Everyone wanted a pension upgrade for the DC... As you acknowledge we were stuck in 2014... but the deal we made then (framework moa) also guaranteed incremental gains for the DC in the reopeners, on top of our 2014 negotiated agreement...

Despite that guarantee we threw down major concessions to buy the gains.

I'm glad you like the TBP, because we paid dearly for something that our own legal department acknowledged we would have had 50% chance of getting in arbitration this year and virtually 100% chance of getting in 2020...

The immediate cost of this plan is lower than what the current DC cost is. The cost of this plan over the next 7 years is only a few million over what the DC would have cost the company in the same period. Far below the incremental gains we had already agreed to moving forward...

Further the actual benefit - in terms of company contribution levels - is to very few had we needed to wait until 2020 to get it (ITA constraints)... and even then it's only a slight one... That's a trade-off, but a very small one - you'd have to be 320 Captain to be getting less of a contribution vs. DC...

You will be able to buy back your service with your contribution now with what you have put into DC and you would have been in 2020 also, if we had to wait...

The hurry to secure this particular MEPP and the lack of full disclosure by our association on dollar values of concessions vs. gains vs. what we could have got in arbitration is very telling.

The fact the NC walked out on the company's extreme asks only to be turned around to acquiesce to corporate demands by KV and MI is telling.

The shutdown of communications by our association so we couldn't only hear their sell job is telling.

The fact that our own senior executives are part of the she's job is telling.

The fact that they seek to marginalise, and belittle dissenters is telling.

The fact they have muzzled association committee members from speaking out is telling.

The fact some of our own MEC members were muzzled and threatened from speaking out is telling.

The fact the guys giving up the farm here are the same guys that negotiated away the DB for you on 2011 is telling.

The fact these guys won't go after C33, despite everyone else winning similar challenges is telling.

What an association...

Anyway - water under the bridge now...

I'm glad you have pension that you can appreciate now, and I hope we can all move forward together now that this battle is behind us and agree that we need to start building onto what is left - particularly on scope - and making gains in 2020, 2023, 2024...

We have more in common than difference Black/Red DB/TBP - No more targeted gains to get 53% Yes votes... All boats need to rise together.
There are elements and facts you claim here that I disagree with and have heard credible evidence that says otherwise, particularly our ability to ever secure a MEPP in the future. We do know another airline group was waiting in the tall grass to secure the only federally regulated employee spot in the CWIPP, and had we forgone our chance this round it most likely would be gone by 2020. There are other TBPs out there for sure, but most being non-MEPPs and therefore subject to ITA contribution limits. If that's the case, why give up the DC at all?? The largest benefit of at CWIPP is it's status as a MEPP and the ITA implications.
Also, the 50% likelihood of securing the MEPP in arbitration was a random figure pulled out of some lawyer's you know where. In fact, without quoting my source (with in ACPA) it was more of a scare tactic number to pressure the company to reconsider just giving up on good faith negots and going right to arbitration where the MEPP would most certainly be off the table. Federal arbitrators seek to maintain status quo; sweeping changes like a wholesale changeover to an entirely new pension plan would be unprecedented. The only time arbitrators make those kinds of changes are to the employees detriment during times of corporate duress. And 100% chance of securing the MEPP in 2020?? That's 3 years away. In aviation that's a lifetime as you well know. With changes in economic conditions / corporate leadership / ACPA leadership / does ACPA even exist by 2020 / member sentiment etc etc, it's impossible anyone with any respectable amount of time in this business could type that with a straight face....

Water under the bridge.

As you state, we have more in common than different. Still much to be fixed for the guys/gals at rouge, especially on the widebody. Time to secure gains EVERYBODY can get behind. Couldn't agree more.
---------- ADS -----------

lawndart
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 75
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2004 8:47 pm

Re: New TA?

#75 Post by lawndart » Tue Oct 10, 2017 11:38 am

A couple of bits about the CWIPP:

1) CWIPP currently has about $270 million under management. Once all ACPA members are on this plan, those assets will be closer to $1 billion. So I am fairly confident that they wanted ACPA business too, rather than just the other way around.

2) CWIPP was suggested as the best option after a search commissioned by ACPA by the firm that manages the DB pension. Spoiler alert: Guess who manages the CWIPP?

Assuming you are already making the maximum contribution to DC, your payroll deduction will only go up 1% in January. Don't fret though: the company contributions stay the same.
---------- ADS -----------

Post Reply

Return to “Air Canada”