New TA reached!

Discuss topics relating to Air Canada.

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

Post Reply
User avatar
Doug Moore
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 91
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2010 2:44 pm

Re: New TA reached!

Post by Doug Moore »

Fanblade wrote: Due to the time factor, the risk of a solvency issue with the plan sponsor, or risk of OFSI involvement (distressed pension plan “workout scheme”) is much much different for a thirtysomething than a sixtysomething.

This is the airline industry after all. ...
Thanks for your sensible comments. Yes, this is the airline industry after all. An industry littered with the carcasses of many failures. Why have there been so, so many failures? I can’t really say because I, like you, work in the pointy end of an airplane where failure is not an option; and not in some office somewhere crunching numbers, buying fuel futures, planning marketing strategy, negotiating supply contracts or whatever it is that all those managers, directors, vice-presidents, executive officers, chief executive officers, etc., do as part of their job description.

I am reminded of the time in another life when the President and CEO of Canadian Regional Airlines sat himself down in the jumpseat of my Canadian Airlines aircraft and with a satisfied smile on his face asked: “So, how are things at Canadian Airlines these days?” Now this was a time when our company was losing money, we worker bees were living with many concessions including a 15% pay cut, and when certain executives were paying themselves 6-figure bonuses (required to retain good people, of course). So I looked this guy in the eye and told him the truth as I saw it: “If we pilots flew our airplanes the way you management types fly your mahogany bombers, then you’d have a hundred smoking holes at the end of the runway this morning and that’d be the end of the airline.” A bit of a conversation stopper and kind of rude of me, I suppose, but by that time in the life cycle of Canadian Airlines I had had enough of being made out to be the bad guy in the operation. Because quite the opposite, in my view we pilots represent the single most significant cog in the operation and the glue that holds it all together.

But I digress. The Suits may not appreciate us but please note: they appreciate themselves; and they look after themselves – exceedingly well. They do so on the backs of the revenue we produce with each passenger we safely move from A to B. If we pilots were to hand them a hull loss once a month, in short order we’d have no passengers and none of us would have a job. But we do our job – expertly. Their job – which for the most part they seem to do not very well - is to generate, with each seat, the revenue required to make the business profitable.

The Suits easily justify to themselves $500,000+ pensions (indexed), easily justify “credited service” to inflate those pensions; but your $120,000 (small, by comparison) pension that you had to work 30-35 years of Real service is now too expensive for the company to maintain? Sorry, but I’m not that easily persuaded.

That’s not to say that I don’t recognize that the airline has some real problems. I’m saying that as long as the feed trough at the top is considered by the Suits to be full enough to keep them in the manner to which they’ve become accustomed, don’t waste your time complaining to me about how expensive I am.

Sorry, I didn’t intend to start off on this rant, it’s not really productive, but even as a Retired Guy, sometimes I really get annoyed with the antics of management. If you don’t take a stand with them you’ll be forever moving backwards.

Here’s some info on the distressed pension plan “working scheme” to which you referred. Take a look here: http://www.mcmillan.ca/Files/118845_Dis ... n_0111.pdf

I’m outa here to hit some balls and quaff an ale or two.

Cheers,
---------- ADS -----------
 
Fanblade
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1866
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: New TA reached!

Post by Fanblade »

777longhaul wrote:
If....you go to a DC instead of the DB, and AC goes under, you will loose all of your DC imput overnight. The DB has a federal protection built into it. You will still have some pension on a DB no matter what.
777longhaul,

I'll take your history lesson as gospel. I wasn't here at the time. It doesn't surprise me though. Corporations love DB pensions at first when no liability is present. They are cheaper than a fixed contribution. Once that changes and a liability develops they squeal like school girls and do everything possible not to pay. Sound familiar? I was told CCAA was triggered by an OFSI past service payment requirement. Not sure if that is true. It is part of the reason risk resides in a DB pension whether you realize it or not.

The above should be corrected though. You have DB and DC pensions reversed. No they are not like the US where they just disappear when a corporation does.

But you will not get the DB pension you have been promised if AC goes kaput. You will get 80% (present underfunded liability) of the pension, and no Top hat (SERP). With that lump sum of money an annuity will be purchased for you. If you have a large pension in the 120k range you should expect a 40-45% reduction in your benefit. Retires included. When you die your wife also takes a 50% cut. Your estate gets nothing.

DC pensions on the other hand are 100% yours, even if AC went kaput. Your wife gets 100% of what is left if you pass. Your estate gets 100% of the remainder.

The whole argument for and against DB versus DC plans is based on ones assessment of the risk to your sponsor.

The DB plans risk is your sponsor must survive throughout your career, and all the way through retirement. This would include CCAA or any other intervention by regulators that could change the plan.

The DC pension risk is you hold the bag for earnings.

If I thought AC would remain unscathed for the next 50-60 years? DB for sure. No question about it.

Since I think that is a very risky bet? DC please.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8433
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: New TA reached!

Post by Rockie »

Fanblade wrote:Since I think that is a very risky bet? DC please.
If the union had negotiated a TA where individual pilots could opt out of the DB plan and instead participate in a generous DC pension I would be all for it. It would be an individual choice and the only people who would have to live with it would be the pilot and his family. You could make that choice for yourself and either live high on the hog in your retirement due to your stellar investing skills, or live in poverty because you made a grave error in your impetuous youth. As most people here know I am all for individual choice when it comes to retirement. :wink:

But that's not what the union did.

Under the MEC's supervision and direction the NC negotiated a TA where every single pilot hired after ratification...forever...would be denied the choice. They would have to live with a DC pension scheme for the rest of their careers hoping like hell their skills are up to the job or their investment advisor isn't lying to them. The vast majority will not do very well and would retire with much less than the lucky ones hired before that date. Can you spell d-i-v-i-s-i-o-n?

And what did the lucky ones hired before ratification gain for selling out everybody else behind them? 20% over four years?

If this is ratified it will confirm the worst opinions people have of Air Canada pilots.
---------- ADS -----------
 
accumulous
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 317
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:05 pm

Re: New TA reached!

Post by accumulous »

This is from the Internet CAW Public Website.

http://www.caw2002tca.ca

Air Canada CAW Negotiations.

Air Canada Bargaining opens February 11
Category: Main News Room, AC Bargaining, Air Canada
Tuesday, February 01, 2011 - 15:00

Your elected bargaining committee has sent a notice to bargain to Air Canada. We will open our 2011 contract negotiations on February 11, 2011. CAW president ........ will join us at the bargaining table at the opening and as often as possible throughout negotiations.

Your committee has been working hard to create a set of key demands based on your bargaining proposals meetings and survey results. Wage increases, paid lunch breaks, vacation, sick time and benefit improvements consistently topped the list.

CAW members have made tremendous sacrifices in order to help get Air Canada back on the track to profitability. Today we are working twice as hard as a decade ago and our wages have not even kept pace with inflation.

Our members want respect from Air Canada. Respect can be an intangible issue, but we know it when we have it. Our work needs to be valued, appreciated and paid accordingly. Significant wage gains will go a long way to addressing our need for recognition and appreciation.

Pensions have dominated much of our collective bargaining for the last decade. In 2009, when Air Canada was once again on the brink of bankruptcy, we agreed to a contract extension with an Air Canada pension funding moratorium until 2014. This was to allow Air Canada to move beyond the global financial crisis that had so dramatically affected the overall economy. At that time, and subsequently, the federal government instructed all parties to remain vigilant to ensure the long-term sustainability of the pension plan.

Air Canada is again raising concerns about the funding of the pension plan. This is not surprising given that they have made minimal funding contributions. As the global economy recovers, so too will investments for pension plans. We will be vigilant in protecting our pension plans, as secure pension benefits for our current and future retirees must be maintained. We do not intend to have this round of bargaining sidetracked by pension discussions.

........

Your elected committee and the additional district chairpersons will be joined by legal, economic and pension experts from the National Union as needed.
---------- ADS -----------
 
FICU
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1291
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2007 2:37 am

Re: New TA reached!

Post by FICU »

777longhaul wrote:If....you go to a DC instead of the DB, and AC goes under, you will loose all of your DC imput overnight.
Actually, once the company puts it's monthly contribution in your account it can't be touched as the account is with an outside financial institution in your name.
---------- ADS -----------
 
777longhaul
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 178
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 7:25 pm

Re: New TA reached!

Post by 777longhaul »

For FICU

Your post:


quote="FICU"]
777longhaul wrote:If....you go to a DC instead of the DB, and AC goes under, you will loose all of your DC imput overnight.
Actually, once the company puts it's monthly contribution in your account it can't be touched as the account is with an outside financial institution in your name.[/quote]


Yes, we all know that, BUT, the monthly imput from AC will no longer be coming every month. So the revenue stream will evaporate, and or be negoiated to a much lower amount. (every contract time). They (AC management) need to get out of the DB pilot pension box, so they can screw you over down the road. It is just common sense. They are not trying to improve your life, or the life of your family. That is not their job.

Ask this very important question, do you see senior management going to a DC plan? NOT. Why not, because it is a total transfer of risk, and a very high probablity of failure, due to contract squables, pilots screwing over other pilots, and the list goes on and on.

If, AC went under and never surfaced, there would still be aprx. 60% of the pension available to those on pension. There would be some payouts to those who are over 50, yes 50 not 60. Those under 50 would be at the greatest risk. Whats the average age at AC now, for pilots? If a junior new hire is 35 t 40 years old, when he/she gets hired, how will they fair, with the DC plan? Especially at starting wages, which are a joke now.

With a DC plan, it is month to month. If they can shorten, eliminate, reduce, screw with it, get you to fight another pilot over it, then they will have done their job. With a DB the company has to adhear to the govt rules. The govt has smartened up, after the various tricks AC and other corporations have pulled in the last 20 years with the pension issues. The DC plan, is ONLY controllable, downstream of the company paying it every month for the length of the pilots career. They will hang the carrot on a stick, just like share option plans, how many thousands in the various airlines have fallen for that one. EVERY major airline does it. The last AC stock opened at aprx. 22 a share, now it is aprx. 2.50, and was down to 80 cents not that long ago. You trust these people, to pay your monthly DC plan, at the same rate, and the same amount, for your entire career. Have at it, if you think DC is good to go. Will be interesting to see how it plays out in 20-40 years from now.

If a DC was a good idea, then the pilots would have gone after it big time, and not spent so much earning captial on the DB. IF DC was such a great deal, AC WOULD NOT want it. Think long and hard about that, then think about old age, your family, and your chances of seeing the stock market yield what the DB yields. Right now, a 35 years pension, is worth aprx. 3 million dollars in the revenue stream invested at aprx. 2 to 5 %. So a DC plan would have to make 3 million, and be inversted at that rate, for 20 40 years after your NON forced retirement. Smarter pilots than me, say this is not a good thing, I'm listening.
---------- ADS -----------
 
vic777
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 421
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 9:00 am

Re: New TA reached!

Post by vic777 »

Doug Moore wrote: But I digress. The Suits may not appreciate us but please note: they appreciate themselves; and they look after themselves – exceedingly well. They do so on the backs of the revenue we produce with each passenger we safely move from A to B. .....
The Suits easily justify to themselves $500,000+ pensions (indexed), easily justify “credited service” to inflate those pensions; but your $120,000 (small, by comparison) pension that you had to work 30-35 years of Real service is now too expensive
Boy, if I was rich and had all their money ..... I'd .... I'd ...... I'd probably buy an airplane and fly to Paris. .......... Hey!

You're right, the suits do steal from us, but they can never BE us.
---------- ADS -----------
 
rudder
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4268
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:10 pm

Re: New TA reached!

Post by rudder »

Wow. With all of this pension talk I guess that the B-scale 767 operation is just going to slip past under the radar screen.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8433
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: New TA reached!

Post by Rockie »

rudder wrote:Wow. With all of this pension talk I guess that the B-scale 767 operation is just going to slip past under the radar screen.
Not likely. Maybe we should split this up into separate sellout threads, although we have no information on the LCC yet besides its existence in the TA. The existence of the LCC is not in itself necessarily bad for us like the DC pension is, and it all depends on the conditions. But if it were operated under the same contract as mainline there would be no need to include it in the contract would it?

Maybe it will be better for us.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
---------- ADS -----------
 
Fanblade
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1866
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: New TA reached!

Post by Fanblade »

Moderators,

I know I am new to this forum but I think you need to take a close look at how this section is named.

It would appear "I HATE AIR CANADA PILOTS" would be a much more accurate title.

Just sayin. :lol:

Really guys. Some of you. Not all some are great. But some display such disdain for AC pilots it is palpable. Others appear to want the hate train to keep on rolling, by bringing up anything they can, to throw manure.

Times change. New ideas are not evil.
---------- ADS -----------
 
rudder
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4268
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:10 pm

Re: New TA reached!

Post by rudder »

Fanblade wrote:Moderators,

I know I am new to this forum but I think you need to take a close look at how this section is named.

It would appear "I HATE AIR CANADA PILOTS" would be a much more accurate title.

Just sayin. :lol:
What is the trend in the WJ pilot wages and working conditions? Improvements

What is the trend in the airTransat pilot wages and working conditions? Improvements

What is the trend (post CCAA) in the Jazz pilot wages and working conditions? Improvements

What is the trend (post CCAA) in the AC pilot wages and working conditions? To be determined :shock:

What happens at one pilot bargaining table ultimately affects all pilots.
---------- ADS -----------
 
FICU
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1291
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2007 2:37 am

Re: New TA reached!

Post by FICU »

I don't think anyone thinks a DC plan is better but during tough times a DC plan may be more secure in the long run. I would take the AC DB pension anytime if I knew it was guaranteed with no risk. During this past recession my company hit tough times and had things gotten much worse it could have been ugly. Had we hit rock bottom I would have been happy to have a DC pension which so far is doing very well.
---------- ADS -----------
 
onspeed
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 138
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:48 pm
Location: yyz

Re: New TA reached!

Post by onspeed »

There is more risk with the DC plan then the DB plan, go ask your financial advisor. AC may be struggling financially but it is not due to the pilots. The wages at AC are sub standard now days compared to a lot of other airlines in Canada. The company has saved a tone of money on wage concessions. The biggest benefit to becoming an Air Canada pilot (in terms of wages) is the pension. If you take that DC pension there will probably be a $50 000 dollar difference in yearly retirement earnings once you retire between the two systems. Not only that you will be contributing much more money throughout your career to even be able to come close to matching that DB pension and as Dave pointed out below, he only had to contribute $180 000.

This becomes a huge disparity between pilot groups at Air Canada, it wont even be a B scale. More like an F scale.

Another point I keep seeing is that people believe if they do this it will save the DB pension plan. I would say not true because changing to a DC plan at this time will do nothing to reduce AC's current pension debts, it will take years for enough people to be hired under the new system for it to have any kind of measurable effect.

If your really concerned about saving the DB pension then make other changes that will have a greater effect. ie. increase your pension contributions, reduce the payouts, etc ....
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Doug Moore
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 91
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2010 2:44 pm

Re: New TA reached!

Post by Doug Moore »

FICU wrote: I would take the AC DB pension anytime if I knew it was guaranteed with no risk.
Hi FICU,

I’m sorry, but I don’t follow your logic. As long as AC stays in business, your DB plan is “guaranteed with no risk”. If AC stays in business, your DC plan will not be guaranteed and you assume all the investment risk of the money you have saved for your retirement.

If AC goes out of business, the money held in trust in your DB plan will be returned to you in accordance with the wind-up rules of the plan, and in the case of a DC plan you will have whatever your investment has earned – or not earned - up to that point.

The airline industry is a tough industry, but if you have so little faith in your company’s ability to survive, why work there?

Why throw out a gold-plated plan because your company might not survive? If your company doesn’t survive, it’s still possible that you will still have more money in your DB plan than in a DC plan. If you’re looking for guarantees and “no risk”, I’m puzzled with this attraction to a DC plan.

Cheers,
---------- ADS -----------
 
FICU
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1291
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2007 2:37 am

Re: New TA reached!

Post by FICU »

Doug Moore wrote: I’m sorry, but I don’t follow your logic. As long as AC stays in business, your DB plan is “guaranteed with no risk”. If AC stays in business, your DC plan will not be guaranteed and you assume all the investment risk of the money you have saved for your retirement.
Hi Doug,

As has been mentioned here even though there is protection for a DB plan not all of the money is protected should something happen to the company down the road. My company has only ever had a DC pension plan so there is no other option for me. I have no problem with managing the money for my retirement and am secure in knowing that whatever the company has contributed to the plan remains mine and can't be touched. I'm sure AC will be around for a very long time but with the moves ACE has made in the recent past I wouldn't bet all my chips the company will look the same.
---------- ADS -----------
 
SilentMajority
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 77
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 2:57 pm

Re: New TA reached!

Post by SilentMajority »

onspeed wrote:
Another point I keep seeing is that people believe if they do this it will save the DB pension plan. I would say not true because changing to a DC plan at this time will do nothing to reduce AC's current pension debts, it will take years for enough people to be hired .....
Hi Onspeed.

The possible reason for the company to push for a DC Plan going forward may have something to do with a planned "Pension Work-out Scheme" involving our current Pension Plan(s) shortfall. We will no doubt have a much better picture once the TA is presented. The current $2.1 B insolvency deficit needs to be cleared up somehow ( I believe it is now a 5 yr. window) and we are committed to contribute $1.3 B to the pensions in approx. the next 30 months.
My guess is the company is not 110% clear on where it is going find the cash. Oil is currently at $115./barrel and I doubt that was in anyone's budget for 2011. According to CR it was not in AC's.

Interesting Town Hall meeting with Rovinescu on the Company website. Other than the normal "glass is half-full" and "go AC go", I managed to take away the following insights:

1) WestJet. We currently operate at a 35% cost disadvantage to these guys. If anyone is laboring under the impression that they are a small "boutique" domestic carrier....they are not. CR had a WestJet route map from 2005 and he compared it to their 2010 route map....these guys are big and getting bigger. He admitted that we have had to drop some southern routes due to losses from WJ competition. 35% is a big number.

2) The cost disparity with our US counterparts due to Canadian taxes, airport rents , Nav fees etc. is a staggering $1 Billion per year.....at least according to CR. In other words if we were able to transport our entire operation south of the border that is what we would save. He called it a major head-start for our US competitors.

3) And of course PENSION. He called it a Real Risk to AC but then says he is committed to preserving the DB for current employees. I think we were supposed to fill in the blanks from there.

This is going to be an interesting TA.
---------- ADS -----------
 
bcflyer
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1360
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:35 am
Location: Canada

Re: New TA reached!

Post by bcflyer »

Take a quick guess as to where the 35% cost difference between AC and WJ is? I'll give you a hint. WJ 737 pilots make as much or more than AC's 320 pilots.....

The price of oil is the cost of doing business. If AC didn't plan for it thats managements problem not ours. I don't see any of them taking pay cuts because costs have gone up...

If CR is so concerned about DB pension plans maybe you should inquire as to why he hasn't asked his managment team to switch to DC....

We are pilots. PERIOD We fly the planes PERIOD. As soon as we stop trying to run the company and just look after ourselves the better off we'll be.....
---------- ADS -----------
 
Fanblade
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1866
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: New TA reached!

Post by Fanblade »

Doug Moore wrote:
I’m sorry, but I don’t follow your logic. As long as AC stays in business, your DB plan is “guaranteed with no risk”. If AC stays in business, your DC plan will not be guaranteed and you assume all the investment risk of the money you have saved for your retirement.
Doug,

I believe that is not entirely true anymore. The "distressed pension workout scheme" provisions within the new legislation tip the scale toward the company. Not all the way, but it nevertheless favors the company. Companies used to have to fail to get out of their liability. Now the legislation allows for dealing with the pension liability in advance of CCAA. The devil is always in the details. This devil is negotiations with a CCAA gun to your head, that ultimately require OFSI and gov't approval. Now think about how you think that will play out.

Why did the gov't do this? Because unions have refused to budge. Making failure of corporations the only way out of debt burdens they can not support. Not good for the overall welfare of the country. So guess who looses? Guess who is being set up to loose?

So what used to take wiping out shareholders to accomplish, now means corporate executives can try to shed pension liability, without hurting the shareholders at all. How convenient! In fact, if they are successful they can increase shareholder value. Awesome!

I am willing to sit a listen. For no other reason than I really don't have a better option. The last thing I want to happen, is the regulator basically dictated how this will unfold.

As silent majority pointed out. At the moment CR is touting DC from here on out as the solution. If we say no? Can you promise me the solution imposed later will be any better? Because in 30 month,as the past service moratorium ends, AC will very very likely be in a position to request help under the new distressed pension workout scheme legislation.



Being a retiree have you had access to information from the union, regarding the warnings all AC unions have received from the minister of finance in this regard?
---------- ADS -----------
 
Last edited by Fanblade on Wed Mar 30, 2011 5:02 pm, edited 7 times in total.
Inverted2
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3957
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 7:46 am

Re: New TA reached!

Post by Inverted2 »

Man, are you guys screwed! AC vs. CAI seniority, AC vs. AO Pilots, AC vs. Jazz, FP 60 vs. against, and now a "B" scale to further divde the ranks? :shock:
---------- ADS -----------
 
DEI = Didn’t Earn It
rudder
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4268
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:10 pm

Re: New TA reached!

Post by rudder »

Isn't the current AC deferred past service pension liability payment schedule already a "distressed pension workout scheme" that was reached outside of a CCAA filing? What is there to fear in the legislation?
---------- ADS -----------
 
Fanblade
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1866
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: New TA reached!

Post by Fanblade »

rudder wrote:Isn't the current AC deferred past service pension liability payment schedule already a "distressed pension workout scheme" that was reached outside of a CCAA filing? What is there to fear in the legislation?
Rudder,

The devil in the details. I think we are about to be told the new rules will allow the gov't or regulators to step in and dictate changes to the plan if we have further problems.

But I'm not a lawyer. or make enough on flat salary to hire one. :? Nor have I been privy to the conversations with, or the letter from, the gov't.

I'll wait for the road show. The union paid legal advice.

My point is I think the membership is going to hear check mate, after all these years of ignoring the problem.

We will see.
---------- ADS -----------
 
SilentMajority
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 77
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 2:57 pm

Re: New TA reached!

Post by SilentMajority »

Our Pension Plan has been secured with funding changes that restrict the Company from taking funding holidays in the event of a surplus while providing increased MPU’s. There is valuation process included which provides a mechanism that determines benefit reductions.A good DC plan is included for new hires.

Fanblade:

From the highlighted portion above...could this possibly be the result of negotiations of a work-out scheme that has already taken place? A valuation process which provides a mechanism that determines benefit reductions??....to our current DB plan?
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
c170b53
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 363
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 9:04 pm
Location: YVR

Re: New TA reached!

Post by c170b53 »

Just your dumb ass mechanic who likes to fly on days-off from AC. Was in the plan and got out during the lay-off years (early 80's). During the 90's the union said we couldn't get any money but we got pension improvements. In 2000 forced back into pension plan which reduced my RRSP max contribution, so now as my buddies retire with a nice check, I work on. I'm not alone and albeit I've contributed a whack of money into an RRSP (I won't be forced to forgo the wet for dry dog grub), I'll have 3 times the money put away to receive 1/3 the money my DB brothers will get. DUH... What's a better plan? I'll also will retire with a small DB plan but now the union is worried that retirement milestones will be altered. Great, the union was taken care of their business and sounds like I might kinda (no doubt about it) get screwed again.
If the company had not taken holidays, the DB pool would be fine, as not everyone has a great retirement and not all monies are returned to the estate. The details are with the actuaries and on that note; Why would the pilot group push for flying past 60 when the next step for the company is to further your milestones to reduce pension liability?
One last thing and I'll resume my below the wing position, if something isn't working writing U/S only in the logbook, is telling everyone something unflattering so please provide a few details or info (point me in the right direction as my short term sentence is now a lifetime one).
Good luck gentlemen.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Fanblade
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1866
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: New TA reached!

Post by Fanblade »

[quote="SilentMajority"]

Silentmajority,

I don't want to speculate. Sounds like it though doesn't it. We will know soon.
---------- ADS -----------
 
rudder
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4268
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:10 pm

Re: New TA reached!

Post by rudder »

c170b53 wrote: I'm not alone and albeit I've contributed a whack of money into an RRSP (I won't be forced to forgo the wet for dry dog grub), I'll have 3 times the money put away to receive 1/3 the money my DB brothers will get. DUH... What's a better plan?
Perhaps this is all part of this mysterious 'deferred compensation' system? Sounds like the new-hires will have their retirement funds deferred......forever. :shock: Wonder if the new-hires will get special dispensation to work til 65? If the average new-hire age remains at 35, they will need it. Or perhaps AC will revert to the old days and hire only 25 year olds. Time will tell.

One thing that seems clear is that if the choice for the 35 year old new-hire is AC (DC pension) or WJ, there is much more career money (wages and non-wage compensation) to be had at WJ. Food for thought.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “Air Canada”