Air Canada Pension

[Captvector]

Is anyone able to give an explanation of the current AC pension. Theres a lack of information online. I’m currently at a 705 Canadian operator and considering the switch but would like to get an idea of how it compares to my current operator.

I’ve heard it’s a mixture of a DB and DC pension. Is the value guaranteed or is it dependent on the market like a DC? The ALPA calculator, does this assume certain market returns?

Thanks in advance!

[rudder]

Is anyone able to give an explanation of the current AC pension. Theres a lack of information online. I’m currently at a 705 Canadian operator and considering the switch but would like to get an idea of how it compares to my current operator.

I’ve heard it’s a mixture of a DB and DC pension. Is the value guaranteed or is it dependent on the market like a DC? The ALPA calculator, does this assume certain market returns?

Thanks in advance!

Not quite.

The single pension option available (mandatory subscription) is CWIPP (you can Google it).

Terms for AC pilots are set contribution rates for pilots (based on tenure) and the employer which yield an annual target benefit (similar to a DB formula) but without the DB guarantee (CWIPP can lower benefit entitlement if fund performance cannot meet its obligations - that has never happened).

While not perfect, it can result in a fairly generous entitlement for higher earning participants with greater years of participation . Key factor - your earned benefit is not calculated on FINAL AVERAGE EARNINGS (as in a pure DB Plan) but earnings each year as a member of the CWIPP Plan.

[Flyboy736]

Is anyone able to give an explanation of the current AC pension. Theres a lack of information online. I’m currently at a 705 Canadian operator and considering the switch but would like to get an idea of how it compares to my current operator.

I’ve heard it’s a mixture of a DB and DC pension. Is the value guaranteed or is it dependent on the market like a DC? The ALPA calculator, does this assume certain market returns?

Thanks in advance!

Not quite.

The single pension option available (mandatory subscription) is CWIPP (you can Google it).

Terms for AC pilots are set contribution rates for pilots (based on tenure) and the employer which yield an annual target benefit (similar to a DB formula) but without the DB guarantee (CWIPP can lower benefit entitlement if fund performance cannot meet its obligations - that has never happened).

While not perfect, it can result in a fairly generous entitlement for higher earning participants with greater years of participation . Key factor - your earned benefit is not calculated on FINAL AVERAGE EARNINGS (as in a pure DB Plan) but earnings each year as a member of the CWIPP Plan.

To add to that give us more details OP. How many more years until you retire? Are you planning to upgrade ASAP or more lifestyle? Your career length and path will have a massive change on the pension

[Sharklasers]

The commuted value is punitive though if you leave AC early though.
Right now my commuted value if I quit and went somewhere else is significantly less than what I have paid into it and doesn’t account for the companies contribution at all.

[rudder]

The commuted value is punitive though if you leave AC early though.
Right now my commuted value if I quit and went somewhere else is significantly less than what I have paid into it and doesn’t account for the companies contribution at all.

That seems odd.

Here is an excerpt from the CWIPP website -

Vesting

Sound tricky? It’s not. It just means that you ‘own’ any benefits you’ve earned while in the plan – and you can take what you’ve earned to the date that you leave, with you (unless you’re age 55 or more, in which case the assets must remain in the plan and you become a deferred plan member).
All members are vested from the date they join CWIPP.

https://www.cwipp.ca/features

[Captvector]

Is anyone able to give an explanation of the current AC pension. Theres a lack of information online. I’m currently at a 705 Canadian operator and considering the switch but would like to get an idea of how it compares to my current operator.

I’ve heard it’s a mixture of a DB and DC pension. Is the value guaranteed or is it dependent on the market like a DC? The ALPA calculator, does this assume certain market returns?

Thanks in advance!

Not quite.

The single pension option available (mandatory subscription) is CWIPP (you can Google it).

Terms for AC pilots are set contribution rates for pilots (based on tenure) and the employer which yield an annual target benefit (similar to a DB formula) but without the DB guarantee (CWIPP can lower benefit entitlement if fund performance cannot meet its obligations - that has never happened).

While not perfect, it can result in a fairly generous entitlement for higher earning participants with greater years of participation . Key factor - your earned benefit is not calculated on FINAL AVERAGE EARNINGS (as in a pure DB Plan) but earnings each year as a member of the CWIPP Plan.

To add to that give us more details OP. How many more years until you retire? Are you planning to upgrade ASAP or more lifestyle? Your career length and path will have a massive change on the pension

I’d be looking at 30-35 years depending on when I decide to retire. Likely an early upgrade with a NB FO - NB CA - WB CA career progression. I have friends at AC who are telling me the ALPA pension calculator gives ~350k/year pension for a career progression like that. I’m trying to compare that figure apples to apples to my current DC RRSP matching pension. Would that 350k figure stay the same throughout retirement or is it expected to change and is it in today’s dollars or already adjusted for inflation? Thanks in advance

[Core]

For comparison sake, I'd very much appreciate if someone could let me know what their simulator says for someone joining at 45 with less than 20 years left to go. Is it possible to account for a medium metal chasing progression, not taking the lowest possible bid to equipment or seat at every chance?
Thank you.

[AV80R]

That seems odd.

Here is an excerpt from the CWIPP website -

Vesting

Sound tricky? It’s not. It just means that you ‘own’ any benefits you’ve earned while in the plan – and you can take what you’ve earned to the date that you leave, with you (unless you’re age 55 or more, in which case the assets must remain in the plan and you become a deferred plan member).
All members are vested from the date they join CWIPP.

https://www.cwipp.ca/features

I don't get this either. Isn't the CWIPP just like an RRSP with company match? Why is the reduction in pension absolutely devastating if I choose to retire at 60 vs 65? The last 5 years of contributions if I extend to 65 don't seem to be as nearly valuable as the previous 25+.

[rudder]

That seems odd.

Here is an excerpt from the CWIPP website -

Vesting

Sound tricky? It’s not. It just means that you ‘own’ any benefits you’ve earned while in the plan – and you can take what you’ve earned to the date that you leave, with you (unless you’re age 55 or more, in which case the assets must remain in the plan and you become a deferred plan member).
All members are vested from the date they join CWIPP.

https://www.cwipp.ca/features

I don't get this either. Isn't the CWIPP just like an RRSP with company match? Why is the reduction in pension absolutely devastating if I choose to retire at 60 vs 65? The last 5 years of contributions if I extend to 65 don't seem to be as nearly valuable as the previous 25+.

CWIPP is a target benefit plan. It uses a formula just like a DB Plan (just without the guarantee). You are earning a benefit based on each year contributions are made by you and on your behalf (employer). The earned benefit is calculated to be drawn in the year that you turn 65. If you decide to draw earlier (prior to age 65) you are both lowering the total benefit by ceasing to contribute early, but also by taking your earned benefit early and therefore potentially withdrawing more than your entitlement (this is all based on mortality tables).

In the CWIPP/TB Plan, your most valuable contributions are the contributions made based on your highest paycheques.

[DanWEC]

Don't underestimate how much longer you could draw from the fund for if you retire early.

According to an older NASA study, the average lifespan of an airline pilot who retires at 65 is... 66.

Whereas retiring at 55 gets you around 75.

This is published information and the actuaries who wrote the plan know this.

[confusedalot]

with all respect, that is completely wrong.

66 and retired from the charter/foreign airline crap. with no big pension. I know a guy through extended family who did AC and recruited from the cartierville flying club in the sixties with 200 hours.

the guy is like 90. with the fat gold plated pension.

still going strong as far as I know.

different times, different days, I know.

[DanWEC]

With respect, it's an accepted NASA study and you're a sample group of one. I'd hardly jump to saying it's wrong. They're averages.

Btw, what would someone get joining AC at 50? I'm guessing around $90k...

[altiplano]

with all respect, that is completely wrong.

66 and retired from the charter/foreign airline crap. with no big pension. I know a guy through extended family who did AC and recruited from the cartierville flying club in the sixties with 200 hours.

the guy is like 90. with the fat gold plated pension.

still going strong as far as I know.

different times, different days, I know.

If the guy is 90 today and was recruited young at AC he probably retired at... 55... used to be what guys did... make bank, go enjoy your life and fat pension.

The NASA study is real.

IMG_8495.jpeg (1.46 MiB) Viewed 2284 times

[Protonpilot]

Don't shoot the messenger. I think retiring as early as you can is the way to go, but...

Those numbers seem...unbelievable. Average life expectancy one year if you retire at age 65? Yikes.

This 'study' has been circulating for decades, and has become an urban myth.

Forbes magazine looked into it a few years ago:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/steveverno ... ie-sooner/

Best quote of the article:

"“According to Julie Curtis, Boeing’s director of actuarial services, this graph has no basis in fact. It, and charts like it, have circulated for at least 20 years and, ‘although completely untrue, have become an urban legend.’ Curtis states flatly, ‘Just as important, our data show that the life expectancy of a Boeing retiree does not depend on the age at retirement.’ ”

The actual response from Boeing to this purported study:

https://archive.org/details/boeing-lets ... -7.30.2004

Also, the retirement age for pilots only increased from 60 to 65 in 2007, when George W. Bush signed it into law. That would make the oldest pilot who worked to 65 only 78 years old. In Canada, the data would be even more skewed because Air Canada only changed it to 65 in 2012.

I'll believe that 'study' if I can retrieve it off the NASA website or the Boeing website. Not somebody's Excel spreadsheet with "source: Boeing" added to a box in the bottom left!

[slob driver]

Years ago while exhausted in OGG from not being able to sleep on a layover, I started going down a pilot longevity wormhole and read the numbers posted above. Quite frankly, I was shocked and quite disturbed. The numbers do not support what I would have thought regarding pilot longevity due to factors of higher education levels, health, annual medical etc in pilot groups. I did some more digging and found another interesting report that directly refutes the above study.
It is older data, so take the information for what it’s worth, but I wouldn’t live like I’m going to die at 66 quite yet;

https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files ... M95-05.pdf

[DanWEC]

That's a great article, thank you. I haven't thought to question the NASA data to that extent.

I know it's an older study, and factors that would render the statistics obsolete would include the overall reduction in duty hours, fatigue awareness, increased shielding in cockpits/windows, better air filtration, more awareness on circadian discoordination, awareness of ozone exposure, etc etc.

It also contradicted the established anthropological concept where people who work later in life and stay busier, tend to live longer. Now, this obviously doesn't coexist with negative longevity factors associated with many blue collar jobs, unfortunately. So with that in mind I was under the assumption that the biological toll of airline flying equated to about the same as coal mining.

All this said, one overarching factor that cannot be ignored is working night shifts. In our industry, the position of the sun doesn't matter- when you arrive in Europe after a crossing on a bright and sunny morning, and it's 4am internal time, that's still a night shift. It's well established and irrefutable that night shift work reduces lifespan. Something to keep in mind for cargo work or crossings.

I think I might do some more research of my own and try to correlate some of the studies.

Cheers

[confusedalot]

not that the new google ai thing is reliable, but, google says that it is wrong.

practical knowledge of people I know also says it is wrong. know alot of guys far older than me, and they are still on the planet.

so it is not a sample of just one.

[cdnavater]

not that the new google ai thing is reliable, but, google says that it is wrong.

practical knowledge of people I know also says it is wrong. know alot of guys far older than me, and they are still on the planet.

so it is not a sample of just one.

Living up to your screen name I see, a couple of posts above has already made the “NASA” study wrong, the study is also apparently some kind of earlier fake news before it was cool.
It seems pilots are likely to live longer than the general population partly due to the annual medical screening we undergo for our licence, no matter I still plan on retiring earlier than 65.

[confusedalot]

no problems with retiring at any age you want. some go real fast, some keep going until they can't keep their medical anymore.

personal choice I guess.

[rudder]

Not an urban myth - airline pilots have a statistically higher incidence of several forms of cancer. Glioblastoma, prostate, and melanomas. Not some crazy higher number, but measurably higher than the general population. Causal factors include UV exposure and sedentary work station. Disrupted sleep patterns are also associated with accelerated aging at the cellular level.

Some former airline pilots live to 95. Some active airline pilots are gone by 50. There is no template and there is no certainty. Things like pension and life insurance are predicated on the actuarial application of mortality tables. I am not aware that it is ever segmented out by profession.

So back to pension…… airline pilots cannot maximize pension by retiring early. But the only person that determines when there is enough money to retire is the individual. Sometimes there is more to life than airplanes and money. And money cannot buy more time.

[confusedalot]

talk about going way in the past, which would now be ancient history.

there was a well educated Easter European well educated lady family friend who would tell me just about the same thing.

I smoke, I drink, I flew planes...........rather large ones at that.

by all counts from the experts, I should have died ten years ago.

the point of the post is to shed some light on what passes as truth.

one of the hilarious comments I have heard was......''there are lies, then there are damn lies, and then there are statistics''

hey, researchers do good jobs, does not mean they get it right all the time.

[gqra]

talk about going way in the past, which would now be ancient history.

there was a well educated Easter European well educated lady family friend who would tell me just about the same thing.

I smoke, I drink, I flew planes...........rather large ones at that.

by all counts from the experts, I should have died ten years ago.

the point of the post is to shed some light on what passes as truth.

one of the hilarious comments I have heard was......''there are lies, then there are damn lies, and then there are statistics''

hey, researchers do good jobs, does not mean they get it right all the time.

confusedathowanaverageiscalculated

[confusedalot]

talk about going way in the past, which would now be ancient history.

there was a well educated Easter European well educated lady family friend who would tell me just about the same thing.

I smoke, I drink, I flew planes...........rather large ones at that.

by all counts from the experts, I should have died ten years ago.

the point of the post is to shed some light on what passes as truth.

one of the hilarious comments I have heard was......''there are lies, then there are damn lies, and then there are statistics''

hey, researchers do good jobs, does not mean they get it right all the time.

confusedathowanaverageiscalculated

know all about averages, medians, calculus, matrix, and all of that stuff.

try that one again and try to get it right next time.