Pension Issue

[UAL_TECH]

I 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.

The Ronin,

Makes me proud to be associated with dedicated people such as you that have an intelligent opinion.

A measure of a person’s integrity is in their actions as well as words (Internet Bravado?).
It is interesting that this thread has died without a word from the pilots that were expounding the opinion of pension termination for everyone else but “themselvesâ€.
I would have thought that they would provide proof of their position, continue the theory (debate), or at least post an explaination and/or an apology.

This simply proves that integrity is a sparse ideology these days.

Take Care,
UAL_TECH

PS:
I’ve eaten so much Crow that I have started a ‘Crow Recipe booklet’.

 

[767jetz]

Look people, no one wants to see any pensions get terminated. The pilots are certainly not lobbying for that. I don't think Tilton is lobbying for that either. You can thank the ATSB and the government if any pensions get terminated. Tilton would like for all employees to see the pension dollars they earned. He also has a responsibility to navigate this company out of BK.

If you would put aside the posturing and turn off the defensiveness you'd realize that the only thing pilots are trying to do is protect themselves, but NOT at the expense of others. Heck, if you could terminate my pension and guarantee that I'll see the same, or almost the same, dollars in retirement that I would see otherwise, then I have no problem with that. I don't care who signs the check as long as I see my money.

The problem is that pilot's pensions are far above what the PBGC will cover, plus we get penalized for having to retire at 60. The fact is that other pensions, if terminated, would be mostly covered by the PBGC. It would then be easy for the company to instate a defined contribution plan (much like the pilot's b-fund) to compensate for any difference. If that would reduce the pension liability enough to satisfy the ATSB, then you would get your retirement $, I would get mine, United could move forward and prosper, everyone keeps their jobs, and everyone would be happy.

Not one pilot here ever suggested anything else. I'm not a pension expert. I'm just forwarding information on possible scenarios that was handed down to me from those that are experts. If it can't be done so everyone's retirement $ is whole, or close to whole, then I wouldn't advocate screwing anyone else to protect my a$$. I also don't advocate handing over pensions to the PBGC so tax payers can foot the bill. Everyone involved would prefer more reasonable funding rules from the gov't so that the plans ARE NOT handed over to the PBGC. But if Washington doesn't want to help, then as far as I'm concerned, they hold responsibilty for the burden on the tax payers.

 

[UAL_TECH]

767jetz,

I’ve read and re-re-read this thread.
Technically, no one has made ‘the’ statement.
But the implications through this discussion are clear.
I purposely kept out of the discussion in hopes that one of you would see
that this line of thinking is without merit (not quantifiable).

Disinformation/Rumor becomes a ‘fact’ simply due to being repeated and unchallenged.

Well Sir, I am the challenger.

Your post does well in deflecting/explaining/justifying your part in this debacle; however you continue to skirt the issue.
You speak of ‘experts’ but do not provide expert advice.
Please have your ‘expert’ provide us with a verifiable pension formula and this issue will be closed.

UT

 

[767jetz]

But the implications through this discussion are clear.


Your post does well in deflecting/explaining/justifying your part in this debacle; however you continue to skirt the issue.

I think the implication is only clear to you. I sir, have made no implications, and from what I can tell from the posts here, neither has any other pilot. I think I made my opinion as clear as possible. It is no one's intention to screw you for their own benefit. (Except maybe the government.) That may be your own assumption, and you are entitled to think what you want. But it is certainly not being implied by anyone.

I am certainly not trying to deflect anything. Explain perhaps, but not deflect. If you want "expert advice" I would suggest you go to your union meetings. When was the last one you went to? Did you bother to ask these questions if you did go? Your union dues should be used to get the experts you need to answer your questions so you can make informed decisions.

You seem like the type who will believe everyone is out to screw you, no matter what I say. That's your choice. So I will not try to convince you otherwise. All I can do is tell you, and everyone else, that ALPA is not out to screw you out of your pension. Believe what you want.

767jetz

 

[UAL_TECH]

But the implications through this discussion are clear.


Your post does well in deflecting/explaining/justifying your part in this debacle; however you continue to skirt the issue.

I think the implication is only clear to you. I sir, have made no implications, and from what I can tell from the posts here, neither has any other pilot. I think I made my opinion as clear as possible. It is no one's intention to screw you for their own benefit. (Except maybe the government.) That may be your own assumption, and you are entitled to think what you want. But it is certainly not being implied by anyone.

I am certainly not trying to deflect anything. Explain perhaps, but not deflect. If you want "expert advice" I would suggest you go to your union meetings. When was the last one you went to? Did you bother to ask these questions if you did go? Your union dues should be used to get the experts you need to answer your questions so you can make informed decisions.

You seem like the type who will believe everyone is out to screw you, no matter what I say. That's your choice. So I will not try to convince you otherwise. All I can do is tell you, and everyone else, that ALPA is not out to screw you out of your pension. Believe what you want.

767jetz

767jetz,

Regardless, this is a dead issue (for now).
Your inferences as to my integrity are unjustifiable and unfounded.
However, I do not take offence.
When (not if) UAL re-opens our (AMFA) contract for discussion on this situation, we may continue to expound on this hypothesis.

Until Then,

Wishing you and yours the best of which life has to offer.

Take Care,
UAL_TECH

 

[UAL_TECH]

But the implications through this discussion are clear.


Your post does well in deflecting/explaining/justifying your part in this debacle; however you continue to skirt the issue.

I think the implication is only clear to you. I sir, have made no implications, and from what I can tell from the posts here, neither has any other pilot. I think I made my opinion as clear as possible. It is no one's intention to screw you for their own benefit. (Except maybe the government.) That may be your own assumption, and you are entitled to think what you want. But it is certainly not being implied by anyone.

I am certainly not trying to deflect anything. Explain perhaps, but not deflect. If you want "expert advice" I would suggest you go to your union meetings. When was the last one you went to? Did you bother to ask these questions if you did go? Your union dues should be used to get the experts you need to answer your questions so you can make informed decisions.

You seem like the type who will believe everyone is out to screw you, no matter what I say. That's your choice. So I will not try to convince you otherwise. All I can do is tell you, and everyone else, that ALPA is not out to screw you out of your pension. Believe what you want.

767jetz

Knock Knock,,,,

United pension fuels anxiety

Hello....... Anyone home?????
:blink: UT

 

[UAL_TECH]

Well, we may as well reopen this thread as it is no longer a 'hypothetical'.

So, please tell me again why the pilot pension plan is funded and no one else’s is?

Thanks in Advance,
B) UT

 

[ualdriver]

I'll warn you UAL_TECH I'm not a pension expert but I do ATTEND my union meetings AND communicate with my union leadership often concerning this issue and this is where I got my info concerning ALPA pensions and to extent the other unions'/management pensions. I just talked to my guys yesterday. I suggest you contact YOUR union leaders to find out what is going on with YOUR pension. Further, I'm not going in circles with you guys debating how evil pilots are, etc., etc., and how we're going to somehow not get screwed while everyone else will be. If you really believe that, I'm not going to waste my time trying to change yours or anyone else's minds.

The pilot pension is not "funded" per se while everyone elses' isn't. We simply have credits that make it so that the company CURRENTLY does not have to make minimum mandated payments into our fund. Why do we have credits and perhaps the management/afa/amfa guys don't? Our pensions are all run separately. Ask AMFA and your union representative, but is definitely NOT some secret conspiracy under the table screw everyone else deal. ALPA's pension is in poor shape as well, period. We pilots, in addition to taking extremely large paycuts also made a pretty big concession in reducing our multiplier to make our pension "look" actuarially better. That probably is a big part of it. I don't believe the other unions took that drastic step like we did when they took their concessions. Maybe they will now. Who knows.

767jetz and busdrvr, as usual, are telling it as it is from my understanding as well. You anti-pilot conspiracy theorist guys can take great comfort in knowing that pilots like me (several years in with the company) will more than likely lose a large PERCENTAGE of our pension if not all of it, just like everyone else. Guys that are close to retirement and those who have already retired (pilots and management in particular) will really be hurt financially percentage-wise if the PBGC takes over. But they deserve it, right? They're all bad people who were overpaid anyway.

IF there is any saving grace for the AFA/AMFA/IAM guys who are close to retirement and don't really have "time" to increase their savings to make up for their retirement shortfall, my understanding is that the PBGC limits will probably cover most, if not all, money they might lose if UAL gets permission to terminate its pensions plan because the PBGC limits are higher or close to what they would have got paid anyway by UAL's pension funds. I think that's what 767jetz was trying to communicate before you guys jumped all over him. The only thing that would change for those people would be that the PBGC would send them a check instead of United Airlines.

So to summarize according to my understanding of the way things stand right now as explained to me (subject to change as soon as I hit the enter key):

1) All employee groups will be screwed, especially any high earner close to retirement age (evil pilots, evil white collar guys, etc.)
2) All employee groups pensions are managed separately and therefore will probably have separate solutions, up to and including distress termination, depending on what course the individual unions decide to take.
3) All the pensions, no matter which employee group, are governed by the same laws. No one employee group can get super-secret "sweetheart" deals at the expense of the others.

 

[UAL_TECH]

ualdriver,

Thanks for the tirade.

I just checked my PM's and low and behold, guess who was not there?

So it is quite evident (de facto) that you wish this discussion to be in an open forum.

Additionally, I would think at this juncture, that you would not throw the 'talk to your union' crap at me again.

Furthermore, I never said that you (pilots) were evil. I have the utmost respect for many of you gentlemen/gentlewomen but I am not easily lead down the ‘Primrose Path’ without a little explanation.

I think what really excites my interest is, if this is such a ‘non-issue’, then what is the anger that has been generated by your post?

As I said, it is no longer a 'hypothetical' (the pension issue).

Maybe you need some ludes........



:huh: UT

 

[BoeingBoy]

I hope this isn't redundant, but here's what we've learned the hard way at US Airways after our (pilots') DB plan was terminated.....

There are different groups for protection purposes (not employee groups, but groupings for a specific DB plan), beginning at the top with "PC1" and so on. I don't know who goes into "PC1" or "PC2" but we had no pilots in those groups. "PC3" was the highest group we had - those over 53 when the DB plan was terminated (this includes retirees).

What the PBGC does when they take over a terminated plan is calculate everyone's pension benefit per the contract as though they had retired 3 years before termination of the plan, i.e., if someone was just 53 when the plan was terminated, they would calculate their benefit as though they had retired at age 50.

They then start with the highest protected group, spread the available money (what was in the plan) equally among this group (on a percentage of calculated benefit as above) until either the money runs out or everyone in the top group gets 100% of their calculated benefit.

If money is left over after the top group gets 100% of the calculated benefit, the PBGC goes to the next group and repeats the process.

When the money is used up, everyone in lower groups gets the PBGC guaranteed amount, which is where the "maximum" figures you occasionally see come into play. Likewise, if you're in a group that was alloted money from the pension funds but your allotment is less than the PBGC guarantee then you get the guarantee.

Other tidbits....

There is no lump sum option available, only annuities. However, if the amount you are entitled to receive is very small the PBGC will only pay you as a lump sum.

For those with spouses, there are several spousal benefit options and the penalty is low (for 50% spousal benefit it's 0.6% per year of age difference between the employee and spouse if the spouse is younger)

For those in protected groups where the money available is greater than the guarantee, you can retire at any time and receive the annuity without penalty - there is no penalty for early retirement (since your benefit was based on retirement 3 years before termination), nor is there any extra benefit for waiting beyond normal retirement to start drawing your annuity.

Hope this helps some and I really hope you folks don't end up having to deal with the PBGC.

Jim

 

[UAL_TECH]

BoeingBoy,

Thanks for the information.
Good fortune to you and your constituents at USAir.

Take Care,
UT

 

[ualdriver]

UT-

I wasn't trying to write a tirade. That's how long it took me to explain what my understanding of what was going on was. And believe me, I'm not angry. I figured out about 8 years ago that I would never see a dime of my A plan so none of this is surprising.

I wasn't trying to annoy you by saying talk to your union. EVERY employee group, including the pilots who are also misinformed by a lot of stuff, should be talking to their union to find out what was going on with their respective pensions because my ALPA leaders that I talk to generally don't know what's going on with the other groups or even know what is best for the other groups.

I rarely PM anybody.

Loss of pensions is certainly not a "non-issue." Many people will suffer, lose houses, have degradations in retirement lifestyles, and be hurt in general. We're all going to get screwed together, whether UAL ultimately ends up signing the pension checks or the PBGC.

The "evil pilot" and "evil management" comments were put there because the general belief, in my opinion, is just that. Anyone whose profession who earns more than ones' respective work group is just evil and out to get the others. The flight attendants say that about the mechanics and the pilots. The rampers and cleaners say that about the mechanics. The mechanics say that about the pilots and management. And the pilots say that about management. Management over the years has created that devisiveness and they were successful. I see it on these boards every day which is why I rarely post anymore even if I have useful information to post.

ualdriver

 

[Dizel8]

"You can thank the ATSB and the government if any pensions get terminated."

Why, because they did not issue a loan guarantee?

Perhaps you should blame the blunders by management or the pressure put forth by the interested parties, to allow the pensions to be underfunded and to allow the company to defer payments.

The pilots gave up a ton of money, with the expressed consent, that the company would retain the DB plan. Now, it appears, that the company is at least considering terminating the plan. In which case, the PBGC and the taxpayer will foot the bill.

The PBGC recently stated, that they could be facing a significant money crisis, due to pension terminations increasing.

 

[UAL_TECH]

ualdriver, 767jetz, UAL06, etc...

This day would come eventually.

I hold no grudges and/or animosity to you gentlemen and/or gentlewomen (as the case may be).

"Our" situation 'sucks' but I will in no way be part of a systemic degradation in our 'search to profitability' by continuous capitulation to save our company through our collective pay and benefits.

I refuse to be a part of the ideology that we must 'shrink to profitability'.

This philosophy has not worked in the past and will not work in the future.

Most of you know my position (past and present), but I will not to put my Family, CoWorkers, Friends, myself, and etc... through the "living hell" that our Brothers and Sisters are going through at USAir.

Here is a little of what we know and how 'I' (JMHO) perceive the future:

I want to make it perfectly clear that in order to make pension changes, that the Mechanics and Related contract must then be renegotiated. This will compel our representation presenting the 'changes' to our contract for 'Membership' ratification.

This ratification process will include a 'Strike Vote'.
What do you speculate/postulate will happen next?

Will you stand with Us?

Take Care and good luck to us all!!!

JMHO&PO,
B) UT

 

[767jetz]

I refuse to be a part of the ideology that we must 'shrink to profitability'.

I just don't think this is the case. Nothing I have heard Tilton say, and nothing I have heard from my union indicates that they want to shrink to profitability. In fact Tilton believes just the opposite and wants to focus on our strengths. One of those strengths is our route structure and international presence. As an example, we are adding flights to the Pacific wherever we can. I've also read that we are taking in some overhaul work from other companies.

This doesn't sound like shrinking to profitability to me. Ofcourse we are being asked to be more productive and do more more with less. That trend is common throughout this entire country, regardless what industry you work in.

As far as pensions go, everyone needs to assess their own situation and become as informed as possible with their options and the status of their individual pensions. Union officials and attending meetings are probably the best source of accurate and timely information.