----------------
On 4/22/2003 9:16:43 AM WXGuesser wrote:
I don''t think pensions are attachable at all, union or management. All the bankruptcy judge can do is eliminate any further payments into the pensions
----------------
The catch is that the pensions have to be fully funded, otherwise just what has been funded can be protected. While the union pensions are not fully funded, they have been funded to a fairly large % (though not 100). Before this move, the executive pensions had been funded at 0%. So until now, if AA went bankrupt, the rank and file got to keep the majority of their pensions, and management got nothing. Now management gets something, too, though from reports their fund is still funded at a lower % than the union funds. So if AMR goes bankrupt now, the unions get partial pensions, as does management, though management still gets a greater cut from what they had been promised in their pensions.
Personally, I don''t think there should be any strong reason to protest this move to protect management pensions, IF the management pensions stay funded at a lower % than the unions. If the unions are 70% funded and management funds are 100% funded, then this becomes a problem. But if union funds are 70% funded and management is 50%, then what is there to complain about?