We have no retirement because against the advice of the R & I Committee the MEC didn't freeze the plan.
John Davis got "a" lump sum, we get next to nothing.
That's the bottom line.
Youn believe whatever fairytale you want.
First of all you do have a retirement. Its just different than the one you contractually had. It is a new contractual retirement that you didn't get to vote on.
Your fixation on blaming the ones who stood by your former contractual earnings in opposition to the ones who gave it back to the company is simply ridiculous. The company chose not to adequately fund the obligation they had to you and 13 voted to say that was not a problem. Excused. New retirement. And you persist in blaming the only ones who stood by the contract. Unity my ass.
He was but one vote on the MEC. Just one, no matter what his intent or stance. We all should have been smart enough long before that, 10 years prior, and gone with a DC plan. But we were all comfortable under the ALPA blanket thinking all was well. Like Phoenix said, the real crime was the guys that terminated our pension with no vote. Glad we are having a "pension" night here, we were due a change in subject matter! RR
ownership. (16c) The bundle of rights allowing one to use, manage, and enjoy property, including the right to convey it to others. ● Ownership implies the right to possess a thing, regardless of any actual or constructive control. Ownership rights are general, permanent, and heritable. Cf. POSSESSION; TITLE (1). [Cases: Property 7, 11.]
"Ownership does not always mean absolute dominion. The more an owner, for his advantage, opens up his property for use by the public in general, the more do his rights become circumscribed by the statutory and constitutional powers of those who use it." Marsh v. Alabama, 326 U.S. 501, 506, 66 S.Ct. 276, 278 (1946) (Black, J.).
"Possession is the de facto exercise of a claim; ownership is the de jure recognition of one. A thing is owned by me when my claim to it is maintained by the will of the state as expressed in the law; it is possessed by me, when my claim to it is maintained by my own self-assertive will. Ownership is the guarantee of the law; possession is the guarantee of the facts. It is well to have both forms if possible; and indeed they normally co-exist." John Salmond, Jurisprudence 311 (Glanville L. Williams ed., 10th ed. 1947).
This debate over the pension is just another form of logic over emotion. I posted the above because this same "debate" extends into everything we do as a union/company/country.
For example, you may "own" a shovel but if you "loan" it to you neighbor he/she controls it. I loan you a "loaf of bread" and maybe I expect payment in return.
Reading the history of defined benefit and defined contribution plans over the years, along with ERISA history is always helpful.
For those who fly airliners for a living, your certificates do not belong to you. The same goes for the airline. Your ATP and the companies Certificate of convenience and necessity are looked at in the law as contractual agreements. The FAA is SOVEREIGN in the air transportation for example and you the person and you the corporate person through the FARs and the FOM, MEL and Maintenance manuals are bound to them to contractually comply with those "agreements". If not, administrative law is used to adjudicate both claims.
The same or similar is with DB and DC under ERISA. These are CONTRACTUAL agreements where you MAY have a contractual legal claim for reimbursement but YOU DO NOT OWN IT! You have ONLY the limited control statutorially agreed to but you do NOT HAVE OWNERSHIP. Like social security, ERISA is subject to change from Congress and enforcement from the administration. You can sue in the judicial forum, but the Pyrrhic victory means nothing if you're forced to use most of your real money to achieve the claim.
The problem with unions has been and always will be, just like this forum, putting emotion before logic. Many years on this forum I have tried to discuss these issues from a legal and logical standpoint and then the epitaphs flow like water over the Niagra.
All three of you are correct from each of your perspectives....but until labor comes up with a valuation system....labor, not judges, arbitrators, lawyers or others....that align themselves in a unified perspective will harmonic and leveraged strength will occur.
That will, most likely, NEVER OCCUR HERE.
Let the ripping begin.
