Airlines Want Pension Help, But Lack United Front

Wretched Wrench

Veteran
Apr 21, 2003
1,626
12
Struggling U.S. airlines are descending on Capitol Hill seeking help with pension costs, but they are not presenting a united front.

Earlier this month Delta and Northwest airlines warned lawmakers that pension costs could push them into bankruptcy and pension default — like United Airlines — if Congress does not act.

But this week American Airlines is trying to steer lawmakers away from tailoring assistance to the worst-off airlines, while seeking help for those whose pensions are better funded, like its own.

"We are taking a message to Congress that says, 'Look, we continue to fund our pension plans, our plans are well-funded and the kind of pension reform that we need should be recognized,'" Mark Burdette, American's vice president of employee relations, said in a telephone interview Tuesday.

American is flying in some 300 of its employees to talk to lawmakers as a House subcommittee votes Wednesday on a pension reform bill. Burdette said the legislation is a template for reforms that the airline prefers, although there could be "improvements."

Introduced by two prominent Republicans, Reps. John Boehner and Bill Thomas, the bill would require companies to fully fund their pensions within seven years. It would also shore up the federal pension agency by making companies pay higher premiums to the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp.

Delta and Northwest told the Senate Finance Committee June 7 that they needed much more time, about 25 years, to repair the underfunding in their pension plans.

Delta and Northwest said they would be willing to freeze their plans — that is, stop the accrual of benefits — in exchange for legislation allowing them to postpone payments.

American also wants to be able to stretch out pension contributions, Burdette said, but doesn't need 25 years, and doesn't want to be required to freeze its plan to get relief.

"We actually have the best-funded plan in the industry, at about 80 percent right now. ... We said to our employees that we would do everything that is possible to preserve our defined-benefit plan," Burdette said.

Rep. Tom Price, R-Ga., sponsor of a House bill that would accomplish what Delta and Northwest seek, said that instead of freezing its plan, American could agree to fund any new benefits in the year that they accrue, in order to qualify for relief under his bill.

Price, whose state is home to Delta, denied his proposal was an airline bailout, saying that without pension reform, more airlines would unload their pensions on the PBGC, as United is doing. This in turn would increase the risk of that taxpayers would have to bail out the PBGC, he said.

A Washington think-tank warned that even the Boehner bill would not rescue the PBGC, although it would be a step in that direction. The Center on Federal Financial Institutions said the PBGC could run out of cash in 2027 with Boehner's reforms.
 
Its a Win-Win for AA.

If the airlines are forced to fund their pensions within 7 years then they will not have the cash to expand.

If they are forced to terminate they will have to go to DC plans which would have the same result-using up more cash in the near future, giving AA an advantage.

If they fail to get what they want and the other airlines get the extension plus freeze their plans then the company can claim "Sorry fellas, we tried".

Anyone who believes that they are fighting out of some sense of duty to their employees is out of their minds and short on memory.

Just remember how back in 2001 the airlines asked the unions to help lobby for relief, however a short time later when the unions asked for lobbying help in getting assistance for the thousands of laid off workers from the industry the airlines turned their backs on us.

The airlines showed how much they cared about us then.

The primary reason why AA is doing this is because if they get their way it will be good for AA. The fact that it might help the employees is just a selling point to get employees to give up their time for the company and disguise the real motive.
 
Bob Owens said:
Its a Win-Win for AA.

If the airlines are forced to fund their pensions within 7 years then they will not have the cash to expand.

If they are forced to terminate they will have to go to DC plans which would have the same result-using up more cash in the near future, giving AA an advantage.

If they fail to get what they want and the other airlines get the extension plus freeze their plans then the company can claim "Sorry fellas, we tried".

Anyone who believes that they are fighting out of some sense of duty to their employees is out of their minds and short on memory.

Just remember how back in 2001 the airlines asked the unions to help lobby for relief, however a short time later when the unions asked for lobbying help in getting assistance for the thousands of laid off workers from the industry the airlines turned their backs on us.

The airlines showed how much they cared about us then.

The primary reason why AA is doing this is because if they get their way it will be good for AA. The fact that it might help the employees is just a selling point to get employees to give up their time for the company and disguise the real motive.
[post="278124"][/post]​

This is one of those rare cases where both AA and the employees will benefit. And of course it is good for AA. Do you think AA will do things that are not good for it? Like you, it will act in it's own best interests. AA says it does not need to freeze the plans and it does not need 25 years to catch up. Assume they did get 25 years to pay the underfunding, that amounts to about $100 million a year (2.6 billion Projected benefit obligation divided by 25 years). In another post you stated "forget the pensions" but I think many will disagree; especially the pilots because they don't want to lose that 7 figure DB pension. As far as the 9/11 bailout, I said then that congress should have stipulated as a condition of the bailout that the airlines institute early retirement programs. They should have given an incentive for the senior people to retire in order to not layoff so many people. But when you go from a fleet of 950 planes to about 730, you are definately going to need a lot less people.
 
Like I've said before. What makes you think they will have the money in 7,10, or 25 years? Airlines seem to go through 5 year economic cycles. 5 years up and 5 years down. So 7 years from now we will be in the middle of another down cycle. What excuses will the industry have then?
 
Don't get me wrong!

I hope our pension is speared the trip to the PBGC!

I still predict a freeze given the price of oil and its devasting effect on airlines.

But have you seen all the news wires about AMR paying $75 million into the pension plans?

All of a sudden this is major news! Something they are supposed to do!


Repeat! Don't get me wrong! I want my pension as is!


But you have top admit that AA is running a PR campaign in the midst of their lobbying congress for long term relief!
 
Hopeful said:
But have you seen all the news wires about AMR paying $75 million into the pension plans?

All of a sudden this is major news! Something they are supposed to do!
Repeat! Don't get me wrong! I want my pension as is!
But you have top admit that AA is running a PR campaign in the midst of their lobbying congress for long term relief!
[post="278265"][/post]​

CO issued a big press release last week with similar fanfare over the contribution of $50 million to its DB plans; makes sense to do that at the same time you are lobbying Congress for more time to make up the shortfall. It can't hurt to show that you're paying your bills when asking for more time to pay them.

Here's a link to CO's news:

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/050614/datu026.html?.v=13

A very stark contrast to USAir and UAL, both of which simply dumped the pensions onto the PBGC.

$213 million of AA's expected $310 million 2005 contributions, and it isn't even June 30 yet. THAT isn't bad news. There's lots of bad news, but paying one's obligations isn't.
 
Bob Owens said:
Its a Win-Win for AA.

If the airlines are forced to fund their pensions within 7 years then they will not have the cash to expand.

If they are forced to terminate they will have to go to DC plans which would have the same result-using up more cash in the near future, giving AA an advantage.

If they fail to get what they want and the other airlines get the extension plus freeze their plans then the company can claim "Sorry fellas, we tried".

Anyone who believes that they are fighting out of some sense of duty to their employees is out of their minds and short on memory.
[post="278124"][/post]​
Bob, I don't care what the others say. I don't think you are the least bit cynical. :lol: :lol: :lol:
 
So basically, there are those who believe AA is funding the pension because of overwhelming concern for employees.

They HAVE to fund it because of regulations, not generosity. And since they are not in CHAPTER 11, they have no choice but to do so.

Yes, it is good news!


But with oil prices nearing $60 a bbl, where do you think further profits are heading?

Before you know it. $70 a bbl will be here!