What union approval? If you dont give UAL what they want they will use the courts
to put it in (guess where)far enough to touch your tonsils.
to put it in (guess where)far enough to touch your tonsils.
Pension Issue
- Thread starter UnitedChicago
- Start date
I am surprised at some of the posts from pilots about letting the smaller pension plans go to the govt. and keep the pilots plan intact.
All plans in the govt. are smaller, so why would they think this would be fair for the smaller plans.
From my veiwpoint, all pilots retirement plans should be from the smallest aircraft.
With increases in wages from the larger aircraft, there is plenty of money there to fund their own retirement plans higher if they wish.
The days of huge retirement funding is over. This includes ultra high management packages too.
Until Ual can get back to a very profitable place, they cannot afford to fund more than conservative pension plans.
Can anyone tell me what percentage of a persons pay is Ual responsible for putting into pensions for them?
I wonder if pension negotiations got out of hand like all other pay situations during working to contract times, within our groups.
All plans in the govt. are smaller, so why would they think this would be fair for the smaller plans.
From my veiwpoint, all pilots retirement plans should be from the smallest aircraft.
With increases in wages from the larger aircraft, there is plenty of money there to fund their own retirement plans higher if they wish.
The days of huge retirement funding is over. This includes ultra high management packages too.
Until Ual can get back to a very profitable place, they cannot afford to fund more than conservative pension plans.
Can anyone tell me what percentage of a persons pay is Ual responsible for putting into pensions for them?
I wonder if pension negotiations got out of hand like all other pay situations during working to contract times, within our groups.
Could Analyst be Chip? Hmmmm....ual06, 767jetz , ualflynhi, Busdrvr,
You are Experts!!! (At Deflection)
After my BP gets under 1000/2000 I may even add extended comments to your rhetoric.
For now, let’s deal with the facts.
***********************************************************
Busdrvr
Posted: Sep 16 2003, 05:19 AM
ALPA's pension fund is the least underfunded.
F/A's and mechs have the least to loose with termination (Max payouts may be near accrued benefit). would not be surpised to see UAL, with approval from the unions, terminate the F/A and IAM (AMFA) pensions and retain the ALPA fund, leaving you holding the bag (you asked for it...)
UAL's pension are considered more underfunded because they changed the pension assumptions to the most conservative in the industry.
If UAL were to terminate the funds, the government, by taxing all you idiot UAL bashers, will pick up the slack, to the tune of $5 billion.
If they get relief, you UAL bashers can use that tax savings to buy all the tickets you want on whatever scab outfit you typically fly.
The potential PBGC liability is NOT the same as the companies. The PBGC uses MUCH more conservative assumptions.
Posted: Sep 16 2003, 06:44 PM
Fly, see 767's reply.
I could see a solution whereby you get your ENTIRE pension (backed by Sammy), only with the signiture of the PBGC on the bottom. Pilots must retire at 60, so a complete PBGC solution would actually pay a pilot LESS in retirement than just about anybody with a 65 yo retirement. U set the stage by selectively terminating one plan, so it is legal. Make no mistake, I fully support you getting 100% of the retirement you earned.
Roll under, You're right, the PBGC will just run down to the good old printing press in the basement and print up more cash, or maybe they'll pick some more cash off the money tree in the backyard.... <_< does the S&L collapse of the late 80's ring a bell? The PBGC has NO WAY to pay the full amount they would be required to pay out by LAW. Who will pay? YOU!
***********************************************************
ualflynhi
Posted: Sep 16 2003, 08:59 AM
Fly I think the IAM,and the F/A's pension payments even if they were paid by
the P.B.G.C. would about the same as they are now.Do you think they will pay
80,000-100,000 a year for a ALPA pension recipient ? Isnt the max payment
from the P.B.G.C. about 30,000 a year ?
***********************************************************
767jetz
Posted: Sep 16 2003, 04:19 PM
Fly,
Busdrvr is correct, and I don't think he meant that F/A'S & mechanics would get screwed. I think he said "with union approval." In other words, the pension amount that these employees would normally receive is below the PBGC limit. Therefore, if the plans were terminated those employees should still see the same pension dollars they would have anyway. The only difference is that it is payed out by the PBGC instead of UAL. Some might even argue that you're better off having the PBGC responsible for your pension if the amount is going to be the same anyway. The PBGC = Taxpayer's money.
Pilot pensions are generally above the PBGC limit, and most would see significantly less than expected. Pilots have already taken 7 hits to their retirement with the new contract. (1. Lower multiplier, 2. Yrs of service capped at 30, 3. Payment based on actual instead of book rates, 4. Actual rates took a 30% cut, 5. Pilots on the 747 and Aibus took an additional reduction in rates, 6. B-fund contribution % reduced, 7. B-fund is based on lower pay rates listed in 4&5)
Any plan will be worked out and agreed to by all
***********************************************************
ual06
Posted: Sep 16 2003, 08:31 PM
person's pension is very important to each individual. Apparently UAL is looking at major problems on funding their pension plans. It does appear that UAL considers the termination of some or all of the plans as a last option.
It has been noted here that the IAM and F/A's would most likely take a smaller "percentage" reduction in benefits than the pilots would. It would not be fair for these two groups to take a hit by their plans going to the PBGC and have the pilots remain whole.
Someone, somewhere does have the ability to determine the percentage reduction in benefits that the IAM members and Flight Attendants may take if their plans were to go the PBGC.
Now assume that the company were able to terminate the two plans and retain the pilots plan. Using the percentage number computed, the pilots plan could be rewritten to reflect the same percentage reduction, thereby reducing the company's
liability. Perhaps an approach such as this would be considered fair by all employee groups.
Perhaps a benefit to IAM and F/A's is that their plans would now be "protected" by Uncle Sam.
The pilots plan would still depend on the health of UAL.
***********************************************************
Given these posts, I have to believe that you are 'ALL' imposters,
and not pilots at all.
For your edification: ( as it appears you need some!!!)
***********************************************************
P.B.G.C WEBSITE
What benefits does PBGC guarantee?
PBGC guarantees "basic benefits" earned before your plan ended, which include:
(1) pension benefits at normal retirement age
(2) most early retirement benefits
(3) disability benefits for disabilities that occurred before the plan was terminated
(4) certain benefits for survivors of plan participants.
PBGC does not guarantee health care, vacation pay, or severance pay.
The pension benefit PBGC pays depends on :
(1) provisions of your plan
(2) legal limits
(3) the form of your benefit
(4) your age
(5) amounts PBGC recovers from employers for plan underfunding.
Are there other limits on PBGC's guarantee?
Yes. For example, if your plan was created or amended to increase benefits within five years before it ended, your benefit may not be fully guaranteed. PBGC guarantees the larger of 20% of the benefit or $20 per month for each full year the benefit was in effect. If you own more than 10% of the business, stricter limits apply. Also, if your plan provides supplemental benefits, such as temporary payments, they may not be fully guaranteed. Generally, PBGC does not guarantee any monthly pension amount that is greater than the monthly benefit your plan would have provided if you had retired at your normal retirement age.
***********************************************************
And you still wonder why you are not loved and respected.
:down: UT
You are Experts!!! (At Deflection)
After my BP gets under 1000/2000 I may even add extended comments to your rhetoric.
For now, let’s deal with the facts.
***********************************************************
Busdrvr
Posted: Sep 16 2003, 05:19 AM
ALPA's pension fund is the least underfunded.
F/A's and mechs have the least to loose with termination (Max payouts may be near accrued benefit). would not be surpised to see UAL, with approval from the unions, terminate the F/A and IAM (AMFA) pensions and retain the ALPA fund, leaving you holding the bag (you asked for it...)
UAL's pension are considered more underfunded because they changed the pension assumptions to the most conservative in the industry.
If UAL were to terminate the funds, the government, by taxing all you idiot UAL bashers, will pick up the slack, to the tune of $5 billion.
If they get relief, you UAL bashers can use that tax savings to buy all the tickets you want on whatever scab outfit you typically fly.
The potential PBGC liability is NOT the same as the companies. The PBGC uses MUCH more conservative assumptions.
Posted: Sep 16 2003, 06:44 PM
Fly, see 767's reply.
I could see a solution whereby you get your ENTIRE pension (backed by Sammy), only with the signiture of the PBGC on the bottom. Pilots must retire at 60, so a complete PBGC solution would actually pay a pilot LESS in retirement than just about anybody with a 65 yo retirement. U set the stage by selectively terminating one plan, so it is legal. Make no mistake, I fully support you getting 100% of the retirement you earned.Roll under, You're right, the PBGC will just run down to the good old printing press in the basement and print up more cash, or maybe they'll pick some more cash off the money tree in the backyard.... <_< does the S&L collapse of the late 80's ring a bell? The PBGC has NO WAY to pay the full amount they would be required to pay out by LAW. Who will pay? YOU!
***********************************************************
ualflynhi
Posted: Sep 16 2003, 08:59 AM
Fly I think the IAM,and the F/A's pension payments even if they were paid by
the P.B.G.C. would about the same as they are now.Do you think they will pay
80,000-100,000 a year for a ALPA pension recipient ? Isnt the max payment
from the P.B.G.C. about 30,000 a year ?
***********************************************************
767jetz
Posted: Sep 16 2003, 04:19 PM
Fly,
Busdrvr is correct, and I don't think he meant that F/A'S & mechanics would get screwed. I think he said "with union approval." In other words, the pension amount that these employees would normally receive is below the PBGC limit. Therefore, if the plans were terminated those employees should still see the same pension dollars they would have anyway. The only difference is that it is payed out by the PBGC instead of UAL. Some might even argue that you're better off having the PBGC responsible for your pension if the amount is going to be the same anyway. The PBGC = Taxpayer's money.
Pilot pensions are generally above the PBGC limit, and most would see significantly less than expected. Pilots have already taken 7 hits to their retirement with the new contract. (1. Lower multiplier, 2. Yrs of service capped at 30, 3. Payment based on actual instead of book rates, 4. Actual rates took a 30% cut, 5. Pilots on the 747 and Aibus took an additional reduction in rates, 6. B-fund contribution % reduced, 7. B-fund is based on lower pay rates listed in 4&5)
Any plan will be worked out and agreed to by all
***********************************************************
ual06
Posted: Sep 16 2003, 08:31 PM
person's pension is very important to each individual. Apparently UAL is looking at major problems on funding their pension plans. It does appear that UAL considers the termination of some or all of the plans as a last option.
It has been noted here that the IAM and F/A's would most likely take a smaller "percentage" reduction in benefits than the pilots would. It would not be fair for these two groups to take a hit by their plans going to the PBGC and have the pilots remain whole.
Someone, somewhere does have the ability to determine the percentage reduction in benefits that the IAM members and Flight Attendants may take if their plans were to go the PBGC.
Now assume that the company were able to terminate the two plans and retain the pilots plan. Using the percentage number computed, the pilots plan could be rewritten to reflect the same percentage reduction, thereby reducing the company's
liability. Perhaps an approach such as this would be considered fair by all employee groups.
Perhaps a benefit to IAM and F/A's is that their plans would now be "protected" by Uncle Sam.
The pilots plan would still depend on the health of UAL.
***********************************************************
Given these posts, I have to believe that you are 'ALL' imposters,
and not pilots at all.
For your edification: ( as it appears you need some!!!)
***********************************************************
P.B.G.C WEBSITE
What benefits does PBGC guarantee?
PBGC guarantees "basic benefits" earned before your plan ended, which include:
(1) pension benefits at normal retirement age
(2) most early retirement benefits
(3) disability benefits for disabilities that occurred before the plan was terminated
(4) certain benefits for survivors of plan participants.
PBGC does not guarantee health care, vacation pay, or severance pay.
The pension benefit PBGC pays depends on :
(1) provisions of your plan
(2) legal limits
(3) the form of your benefit
(4) your age
(5) amounts PBGC recovers from employers for plan underfunding.
Are there other limits on PBGC's guarantee?
Yes. For example, if your plan was created or amended to increase benefits within five years before it ended, your benefit may not be fully guaranteed. PBGC guarantees the larger of 20% of the benefit or $20 per month for each full year the benefit was in effect. If you own more than 10% of the business, stricter limits apply. Also, if your plan provides supplemental benefits, such as temporary payments, they may not be fully guaranteed. Generally, PBGC does not guarantee any monthly pension amount that is greater than the monthly benefit your plan would have provided if you had retired at your normal retirement age.
***********************************************************
And you still wonder why you are not loved and respected.
:down: UT
I'm shocked!!! You don't mean the pilots and the company would screw us again do you :unsure:
Great info and follow-up, thanks....and just when everyone was thinking it was getting better at the lazy U
Great info and follow-up, thanks....and just when everyone was thinking it was getting better at the lazy U
"Sir, I think we are approaching critical mass..."
"You like apples??? We'll how do you like them apples!!!!"
"You like apples??? We'll how do you like them apples!!!!"
I wonder why UA needs to get more financing that originally projected. Sounds like they need more money to meet the loan guarantee requirements...not good.
UAL may raise financing to as much as $2.5 bln
ALPA MEC CODE-A-PHONE UPDATE - September 16, 2003
The Legislative Affairs Committee reports that the Senate Finance Committee intends to mark up pension legislation tomorrow, and ALPA understands that U.S. Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania had intended to offer the Air Line Pension Act of 2003 as an amendment in committee mark up. However, due to opposition from the Senate Finance Committee Chairman and the Administration on industry-specific pension legislation, Senator Santorum will not offer the amendment in mark up. ALPA s Legislative Affairs Committee and Government Affairs Department will continue to push this legislation when the bill is introduced on the Senate floor. Additionally, H.R. 2719, which currently has 42 co-sponsors, still remains viable legislation that ALPA will continue promoting in ! the House.
UAL may raise financing to as much as $2.5 bln
ALPA MEC CODE-A-PHONE UPDATE - September 16, 2003
The Legislative Affairs Committee reports that the Senate Finance Committee intends to mark up pension legislation tomorrow, and ALPA understands that U.S. Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania had intended to offer the Air Line Pension Act of 2003 as an amendment in committee mark up. However, due to opposition from the Senate Finance Committee Chairman and the Administration on industry-specific pension legislation, Senator Santorum will not offer the amendment in mark up. ALPA s Legislative Affairs Committee and Government Affairs Department will continue to push this legislation when the bill is introduced on the Senate floor. Additionally, H.R. 2719, which currently has 42 co-sponsors, still remains viable legislation that ALPA will continue promoting in ! the House.
"From my veiwpoint, all pilots retirement plans should be from the smallest aircraft.atabuy said:
With increases in wages from the larger aircraft, there is plenty of money there to fund their own retirement plans higher if they wish."
Thats fine. But then all management retirements should be from an entry level management position.
Actually, I've spent time in a combat zone in all but two months this calender year (tax free), so if serving my country and getting shot at makes me a "dodger", then I'm guiltyBizman said:
UAL Tech, you are not a lawyer are you....
Your reading of the law to cherry pick items out of context serves no purpose. The PBGC, depending on your age at termination and several other items, determines your payout. If you are 40, you pension poayout would be less. Now what if the companyagreed to then give a "defined contribution" plan that would result in you recieving a HIGHER pension benefit? would that be a bad thing? Since you understand the PBGC law so well, tell us, what would your PBGC payout be vs the company plan. Give a few examples please. I guess the truth is you have no idea huh?
Your reading of the law to cherry pick items out of context serves no purpose. The PBGC, depending on your age at termination and several other items, determines your payout. If you are 40, you pension poayout would be less. Now what if the companyagreed to then give a "defined contribution" plan that would result in you recieving a HIGHER pension benefit? would that be a bad thing? Since you understand the PBGC law so well, tell us, what would your PBGC payout be vs the company plan. Give a few examples please. I guess the truth is you have no idea huh?
Busdrvr,Busdrvr said:
How did you postulate my ‘cut and paste’ of public information as making a conclusion? I simply put the information out there for people to read so that they understand your rhetoric is merely an ‘assumption’ and not based on empirical data.
As you are the one promoting the unsubstantiated hypothesis that:
“F/A's and mechs have the least to loose with termination (Max payouts may be near accrued benefit).â€
You are the one to substantiate your statement with proof, not I. If you can provide a retirement ‘formula’ that is verifiable with the PBGC and backs up your theory, I will discontinue pointing out your logic is flawed.
UTCareful UAL Tech. Besides posting everywhere on this website Busdvr has been exchanging gunfire with the bad guys, lobbying to toss everyones elses pension except theirs away, and doing it all tax free
Just kidding Busdvr, don't go ballistic on me. From an "ex-vet" with 2 tours in Beruit and (1) Operation Urgent Fury (Grenada), I thank you for any service you may be providing our country. Regards, The Ronin
Just kidding Busdvr, don't go ballistic on me. From an "ex-vet" with 2 tours in Beruit and (1) Operation Urgent Fury (Grenada), I thank you for any service you may be providing our country. Regards, The Ronin
The Ronin,The Ronin said:Careful UAL Tech. Besides posting everywhere on this website Busdvr has been exchanging gunfire with the bad guys, lobbying to toss everyones elses pension except theirs away, and doing it all tax free
Just kidding Busdvr, don't go ballistic on me. From an "ex-vet" with 2 tours in Beruit and (1) Operation Urgent Fury (Grenada), I thank you for any service you may be providing our country. Regards, The Ronin
Thanks for the advice.
Also, Thanks for your service to our 'Country'.
Being a Viet Nam Vet myself, I can appreciate the sacrifice, hardships and disappointments in our ‘system’.
Here’s my opinion: War Sucks!!!
But let us not get off track here.
How would it be perceived if I proposed that all (other) groups joined together in agreement to support the termination of the ALPA retirement fund if they do not touch mine (and maybe even give me a taste)?
Is this a better solution? Who will be the next ‘sacrifice’?
Best of fortune to you and yours.
Take Care,
UAL_TECHI agree. Some posts left by our pilots are pretty callous regarding both our pensions, which were earned like everyone else’s, and the perception that it is right and fair that the taxpayer bear the burden so they don’t have to. Now we can go back and forth with this debate on who has given what and how much, etc, etc. But the reality is unless the government enacts some sort of relief, the pension liabilities will have to go. We might find funding for present and future business operations, but the “old United†and its debt died when we entered BK. And unless we extricate ourselves from BK soon, the cost of being IN BK will start to drag us down like a lead weight, and we may never get above water.
