Dog Wonder
Veteran
Water Cooler
PBGC
- Thread starter diogenes
- Start date
http://www.usairlinepilots.org/press_releases.htm
US Airline Pilots Association Sues Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation
US Airline Pilots Association Sues Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation
Not much info there ..... can anyone provide more details? Could this effect other groups? CWA?
ExPiedmontPacemaker
Newbie
- Sep 18, 2009
- 6
- 2
Hi, I hired on at Piedmont in December 1981 and was laid off on 9 April, 2002. I took another job out of the country. I was still on "layoff" status. In May of 2005 I received a recall letter from US Air. I was not going quit my new job working and living out of the country so I resigned on 25 May, 2005. I was not yet 50 years old so I could not retire.
According to all the correspondence I received from PBGC I was being credited with 23.5 yrs of service. I requested an estimate of benefits I would receive if I chose to take the retirement begining at age 50, 55 and at full retirement age. I decided I would take what I could get as soon as I could get it at age 50, a little over $1100/mo.
Apparently, prior to my eligibility (age 50) there was a decision to stop accuring of senority for people who were on layoff status. I think the date was Jan. 10 of 2002 but I could be wrong about that. (BTW, I was an IAM covered employee and under the contract I left under, allowed to continue accuring senority while on layoff). Bottom line was they were only crediting my time up to the day I was laid off. So they took back 3 years.
I appealed in writing, and was immediately rejected. (they always reject the first appeal). I appealed in writing again requesting a decision by the "board". I had submitted all the evidence I could gather. This required correspondence with the IAM President and Company HR. Really not much help but it was all I had for my case. End result was their ruling was going to stand and I had exhausted all my options short of hiring an attorney to fight it.
The appeal process took well over a year and a lot of time. I can't really blame the IAM or the Company for not helping more since I was no longer an employee. I was however told by the IAM President at the time that there were many other employees in the same boat. Not much help there either.
Fast forward to today, I have now been collecting $943/mo (before taxes) since March of this year. I'm still in the aviation business, making double what I was making at US Air and living the "expat" life outside the US. I invest my US Air "retirement" $$ and hopefully when I really retire (in about 15 years) it'll be a nice little nest egg.
I hope this info helps. If you want I have an email address of a lady at PBGC who was really helpful, even though I didn't get as much $$ as I thought I would. TIP: they request that you begin this process 3 months prior to when you want to start your benefits but it takes longer, really about 6 months.
PS. I really miss my Piedmont days!!
Receive retirement at age 50 at the amount of little over $1100/mo some are not so fortunate. All those years in the IAM/UNION made this possible unlike the late to come union employees
ExPiedmontPacemaker
Newbie
- Sep 18, 2009
- 6
- 2
If you start the process as soon as you can it's possible you'll receive your first check the day you're eligible. If you wait, or there's some sort of problem, the amount of $$/month increases. In my case, I was eligible in Dec/08 but didn't receive my first check until March/09 and the amount increased by a few dollars/month. So it's not really retroactive but you won't lose anything either.
Also another thing to consider are the annuity options, i.e. less $$/month but will pay your beneficiary a percentage after your death. Some guys I talked to actually figured out the difference between getting the full amount vs a reduced amount (for beneficiary) and used that difference to buy a life insurance policy that would pay their beneficiary more than what they would get had they chose the annuity option. So effectively they're getting less because they're spending that difference on an insurance policy. Make sense?
In my case, I chose the 50% option and the difference was about $100/mo less had I taken the full amount without the annuity option. In other words, after I die my wife will receive half of my monthly payment for the rest of her life. $100/mo wasn't enough to buy a really "fat" insurance policy. Also, I figure why let them keep any money after I die if someone in my family can keep collecting it. Since my wife is much younger than I am the odds are she'll live longer than me anyway (unless she pisses me off again!!). Besides I have a good insurance policy anyway. Here's the clincher, once you receive your first check you can never change the terms. Just something to think about.
ExPiedmontPacemaker
Newbie
- Sep 18, 2009
- 6
- 2
Well, had I been credited with all my years of service (23.5) including the years while on lay off, as provided for in the contract at the time, I would have received $1100/mo. But, they took back 3 years because they determined that years of service meant only my time up until I was laid off. Hence less $$/mo. The language that was in the contract didn't matter and was unenforceable anyway. After the retirement was turned over to PBGC the rules changed.
All in all, I'm not complaining as I know people who are worse off. I was fortunate that I found another good job with a great company that pays more. Believe it or not, there is life after US Air and still some good jobs out there, albeit out of the US, if anyone is brave enough to make the leap.
Just curious Expiedmontpacemaker....but how did you 23.5 yrs less the 3 yrs. I also began with PI in 1980, (ramp,cust.svc) im current employee, by pbgc statement only gives me credit for roughly 10 yrs......basically from the time of merger until pension plan frozen/terminated.
ExPiedmontPacemaker
Newbie
- Sep 18, 2009
- 6
- 2
Rufus,
I'm not sure why you're only credited w/10yrs...doesn't sound right if you've been there since 1980? Are you an IAM covered employee? Did you have a break in service? If you don't agree with your PBGC statement I suggest you appeal, in writing within the time frame they give, otherwise you'll be stuck with what they give you.
My original statement from PBGC credited me with 23.5 years of service (Dec 1981-May 2005). My Date of hire until the day I resigned. When it came time for me to apply for benefits PBGC changed the calculation of my years of service back to the day I was laid off which was April/2002, effectively taking back 3 years. They were not going to count the time I was on lay-off status (3yrs). I ended up with 20.5 years of (ACTIVE) service. I appealed but lost.
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Nov 9, 2003
- 16,512
- 5,865
- Banned
- #26
By law benefits are calculated a though you'd retired 3 years prior to the termination of the retirement plan. For example, the pilot's pension plan was terminated on 3/31/2003 so benefits werecalculated as though I retired on 3/31/2000 even though I had no inactive time (layoff, leave of absense, etc)
Did they take an additional 3 years off of your years of service? If not the 3 year reduction of length of service is normal.
Jim
I believe rufus said they were customer/ramp services. without contract protection passengers service employees pension was frozen in 1991 and took pay freezes and a cut in benefits in the ‘90’s when no other group at US Airways did + IAM had the same 401k match that non-union had
The customer service retirement plan was terminated at the same time. they are not credited as though they retired on 3/31/2000 even though they had no inactive time (layoff, leave of absense, etc)
CSA007
Member
- Aug 12, 2008
- 30
- 0
John John why?
CSA had no representation at the time of the pension being frozen.Therefore no funding or language to compensate for the interim or long-term transition no agreements with management.The pilots got a sweet deal during the first bankruptcy.Second bankruptcy got rid of that and now the company contributes 10% to there 401k. the pilots brought more to the table then the other groups in bankruptcy II because of the sweet deal they got in bankruptcy I
