Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Northwest To Freeze Pilot Pension Plan!  
User currently offlineNWDC10 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2574 times:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11114240 Man, i really hope for NW and everyone the best. Robert NWDC10

10 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineFXramper From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 7181 posts, RR: 86
Reply 1, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2569 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Didn't Eastern do this before they liquidated?  Sad

User currently offlineN908AW From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 922 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2558 times:

Quoting FXramper (Reply 1):
Didn't Eastern do this before they liquidated?

Yes. As well as Motorola, Lockheed, IBM, Verizon, and many other successful companies.

Too bad NW isn't one of the successful ones...



'Cause you're on ATA again, and on ATA, you're on vacation!
User currently offlineTOLtommy From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 3288 posts, RR: 4
Reply 3, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2476 times:

NWA pilots are getting more protection than their counterparts at US got, that's for sure. This really shouldn't come as a surprise. Both sides agreed to it some time ago. No trip to PBGC...

User currently offlineCOERJ145 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1421 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2393 times:

so this would mean NW will survive through 2006?

User currently offlineJAFA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 782 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2358 times:

This means the pilots will keep the pensions earned up to this point, and a new 401K type pension plan will start from today until they retire. So they will get thier pension from two plans when they retire. One from the frozen plan and one from the new plan which starts now.

User currently offlineDLPMMM From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 3589 posts, RR: 10
Reply 6, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2342 times:

Quoting COERJ145 (Reply 4):
so this would mean NW will survive through 2006?

Maybe yes, maybe no. If there is a pilot strike or an F/A strike, all bets arew off.

I must make a complement to replies #2, #3, and #5.

Give yourselves a hand N908AW, TOLTommy, and JAFA.

A pension freeze was mentioned in a thread title, and instead of the typical a.net knee jerk reaction, you all made factual and well reasoned explanitory posts.

Kudos.


User currently offlineCentrair From Japan, joined Jan 2005, 3598 posts, RR: 20
Reply 7, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2312 times:

I always wondered why they didn't have 401Ks. Many businesses offer these as a retirement option. Aren't they safer?

I was reading the release from the MX/ground negotiations. The MX/ground didn't want a 401K but wanted the current system. It just doesn't make sense to me.

Good luck NW. Please stick around for those of us from the midwest.



Yes...I am not a KIX fan. Let's Japanese Aviation!
User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 22706 posts, RR: 20
Reply 8, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2285 times:

Quoting JAFA (Reply 5):
This means the pilots will keep the pensions earned up to this point, and a new 401K type pension plan will start from today until they retire. So they will get thier pension from two plans when they retire.

I think it's really the best solution for all involved-- in what is clearly a very bad situation. It's unfair to take away pensions already earned, but at the same time this creates a much better (i.e. more survivable situation) for the company. Both sides are to be commended for this logical and reasonable compromise.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineDLPMMM From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 3589 posts, RR: 10
Reply 9, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2276 times:

Quoting Centrair (Reply 7):
I always wondered why they didn't have 401Ks. Many businesses offer these as a retirement option. Aren't they safer?

I was reading the release from the MX/ground negotiations. The MX/ground didn't want a 401K but wanted the current system. It just doesn't make sense to me.

401K plans are defined contribution plans that are much safer as there are seperate accounts in the individual employee's name generally held by a 3rd party financial institution. Many companies prefer the 401K and similar defined contribution plans as they are much cheaper than the defined benefit plans they are currently bound to by union contract.

The difference between plan types is clear when you look at the names.

Defined Contribution Plan: For every period worked, the company will contribute a given amount of money to your private retirement account (often matching your own pre-tax contributions to the same account). The employee keeps almost complete control over the account and how it is invested. When the employee leaves the company, the company's obligation to the former employee is finished.

Defined Benefit Plan: After a certain vesting period, the company agrees to pay a given % of an employees salary to him each month after retirement until the empolyee and any spouse the employee may have dies. Not a bad deal when most employees died at 67 or so years old. Very expensivew with people reaching retirement in their 50s and living into their 90s.


User currently offlineBobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 6439 posts, RR: 9
Reply 10, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 2146 times:

Before some of you start in with the " I'll bet management does not have their pensions frozen" remarks, that already occurred quite a while ago.

The IAM has chosen to turn the pension for their members over to the IAM pension managers. I think this is a mistake on their parts, just like back in the early 90's when the IAM chose to get preferred stock for their pay cuts, while the rest of the employee groups chose common stock. The common stock groups made a nice profit selling their stock on the open market.

Also, please notice that NWA has not dumped any pensions nor did they ever intend to. "NWA will dump pensions' was the subject of many postings on this board.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Delta Seeks To End Pilots Pension Plan posted Sat Aug 5 2006 07:08:41 by NWDC10
Delta CEO Seeks To Terminate Pilots' Pension Plan posted Sat Jun 3 2006 14:44:57 by Lumberton
Northwest To Freeze Pensions For Salaried Staff posted Sat Jul 16 2005 14:02:36 by KarlB737
Northwest Pilots Vote To Freeze Pensions posted Thu Jan 12 2006 23:31:43 by KarlB737
UAL Pilots To Battle Pension Plan Take-over posted Tue Jan 4 2005 06:39:59 by Scotron11
Court Denies Mesaba Unions Right To Strike - Pilot posted Tue Oct 24 2006 11:06:34 by ADXMatt
Northwest To Pay US$1 Award For Inflight Accident posted Sat Sep 23 2006 04:30:20 by Carnoc
Judge: Delta Can Eliminate Pilot Pension posted Tue Sep 5 2006 21:53:55 by KarlB737
Delta Seeks To Shed Pilots' Pension posted Fri Sep 1 2006 16:37:51 by Gnomon
What Would Happen To This Pilot? (video) posted Mon Aug 21 2006 07:03:10 by Alberchico