PITbull said:
Last time I checked the majority of the executives held advance degrees. You should review your facts. The non-union employment market decides the salary of an individual.
Where is your proof to back up this claim?PITbull said:
Us Airlines Say Pension Costs Could
- Thread starter USA320Pilot
- Start date
Last time I checked the majority of the executives held advance degrees. You should review your facts. The non-union employment market decides the salary of an individual.
Lets see two bankruptcies in less then two years, $2.4 billion in employee concessions and $1 billion in vendor concessions squandered. Constant shrinking of the airline. Attacking employees. Failure to admit when wrong, ie. X-Mas meltdown. Lowest morale for labor.Zeus said:
Should I continue?
Gee those advanced degrees have done wonders for the financial status of the airline.
Lets see WN and JB are profitable, but yet Siegel and now Lakefield made/make more then the CEO's of those two PROFITABLE airlines and US is in bankruptcy for the second time in less then two years. Please explain your theory again.
And don't let actually running the airline get in the way of the executive's golf game, like Bronner said once the merger is completed they can go back to the golf course.
PITbull
Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2002
- Messages
- 7,784
- Reaction score
- 456
Zeus said:
Zeus,
Most of the the VPs have only undergrad degrees. You check your facts.
And on your second response. You're right, I'll take that back. There is NO PROOF they gave any concessions or made any sacrifices at all looking at the 10K reports. :down:
Thanks for pointing that one out.
ClueByFour
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2002
- Messages
- 3,566
- Reaction score
- 37
Zeus said:
What is the market for folks who tanked an airline twice?
Really. Haaavard has sure helped the strategic direction of US. What's the shareholder return on US in the last 5 years? 3 years? 1 year? Bronner?
Loserville.
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- Joined
- May 18, 2003
- Messages
- 8,175
- Reaction score
- 1,539
In the Senate Finance Committee hearing on airline pension terminations and the lessons learned from United’s terminations, earlier this week Senator Grassley committed to broad pension reform. However, it’s my understanding that the PBGC and congressional watchdogs drew very different conclusions on the United situation than the airline industry did.
The PBGC, GAO, and CBO emphasized the need for reform, but through tougher pension funding rules, specifically citing the current credit system and smoothing as “problematic†instead of airline requests for a 25-year period to make up shortfalls.
Doug Steenland and Jerry Grinstein made a their case to spread shortfalls over a 25-year period because of special interest. According to people with knowledge of PAC’s, Northwest’s senior management’s pensions and incentive pay is locked up with Northwest’s stock, thus if the Minnesota-based airline defaults and enters a formal reorganization due to its employee pension underfunding problem, management loses their pension too.
Grinstein’s motivation is more simplistic in that if there is not pension reform, Delta will undoubtedly have to enter a “judicial reorganization†as soon as this winter.
The PBGC acted negatively towards Steenland and Gronstein’s request, but they did not totally close the door and Senate Finance Committee member reaction was mixed.
It appears the next step could be the House GOP and Senate Finance Committee will try to craft a bipartisan proposal later this summer. A potential deadline exists with the expiration of the fixed interest rate fix at the end-of-the year and the potential for the Fed to reissue 30-year Treasury Bonds. Interestingly, the ceasing of issuing these bonds was the motivation for the interest rate change in corporate bonds in the first place.
If no action is taken on the pension, which John Snow and Andrew Card support, then the 30-year Treasury will return, which would be vigorously opposed by big business. If this happens, the Bush Administration could take even a stronger stance against pension reform to support corporate America, so Snow and Card can say the 30-year bond an alternative if companies like Northwest and Delta, and their Congressional delegations, cannot come up with a bipartisan fix that the Bush Administration would support.
It’s important to note that the government, in particular the PBGC, GAO, Congressional Budget Office, specifically spoke to the United situation at the Senate Finance Committee hearing. They used United’s situation as an example that highlighted their view of the many flaws in the current system.
In particular the government testimony of the current five-year asset and four-year smoothing. The witnesses argued this creates a distorted view because of sharp drops of asset values and projected liabilities are hidden, which is happening in the airline industry. The Administration has proposed changes in behind-the-scene discussions, with tougher pension funding rules and a more spot like regime of 90-days, but it appears the solutions offered by Snow and Card will not save legacy carrier DB pension plans. Current industry fundamentals of high energy costs and shrinking revenues, along with crushing pension obligations, will likely require other airline’s to enter a “formal reorganization†to shed these obligations because the Bush Administration apparently will not agree to spread fund market value shortfalls repayments over a 25-year period.
In my opinion, for the young a DC or 401(k) Plan is best, but to change mid-stream for older employees is wrong because they do not have time to make up for the change. Thus, there should be a compromise made to change to eliminate DB Plans to provide a "meaningful" retirement for older employees and sufficient contributions made for younger employees so both groups have sufficient retirement funds.
Regards,
USA320Pilot
The PBGC, GAO, and CBO emphasized the need for reform, but through tougher pension funding rules, specifically citing the current credit system and smoothing as “problematic†instead of airline requests for a 25-year period to make up shortfalls.
Doug Steenland and Jerry Grinstein made a their case to spread shortfalls over a 25-year period because of special interest. According to people with knowledge of PAC’s, Northwest’s senior management’s pensions and incentive pay is locked up with Northwest’s stock, thus if the Minnesota-based airline defaults and enters a formal reorganization due to its employee pension underfunding problem, management loses their pension too.
Grinstein’s motivation is more simplistic in that if there is not pension reform, Delta will undoubtedly have to enter a “judicial reorganization†as soon as this winter.
The PBGC acted negatively towards Steenland and Gronstein’s request, but they did not totally close the door and Senate Finance Committee member reaction was mixed.
It appears the next step could be the House GOP and Senate Finance Committee will try to craft a bipartisan proposal later this summer. A potential deadline exists with the expiration of the fixed interest rate fix at the end-of-the year and the potential for the Fed to reissue 30-year Treasury Bonds. Interestingly, the ceasing of issuing these bonds was the motivation for the interest rate change in corporate bonds in the first place.
If no action is taken on the pension, which John Snow and Andrew Card support, then the 30-year Treasury will return, which would be vigorously opposed by big business. If this happens, the Bush Administration could take even a stronger stance against pension reform to support corporate America, so Snow and Card can say the 30-year bond an alternative if companies like Northwest and Delta, and their Congressional delegations, cannot come up with a bipartisan fix that the Bush Administration would support.
It’s important to note that the government, in particular the PBGC, GAO, Congressional Budget Office, specifically spoke to the United situation at the Senate Finance Committee hearing. They used United’s situation as an example that highlighted their view of the many flaws in the current system.
In particular the government testimony of the current five-year asset and four-year smoothing. The witnesses argued this creates a distorted view because of sharp drops of asset values and projected liabilities are hidden, which is happening in the airline industry. The Administration has proposed changes in behind-the-scene discussions, with tougher pension funding rules and a more spot like regime of 90-days, but it appears the solutions offered by Snow and Card will not save legacy carrier DB pension plans. Current industry fundamentals of high energy costs and shrinking revenues, along with crushing pension obligations, will likely require other airline’s to enter a “formal reorganization†to shed these obligations because the Bush Administration apparently will not agree to spread fund market value shortfalls repayments over a 25-year period.
In my opinion, for the young a DC or 401(k) Plan is best, but to change mid-stream for older employees is wrong because they do not have time to make up for the change. Thus, there should be a compromise made to change to eliminate DB Plans to provide a "meaningful" retirement for older employees and sufficient contributions made for younger employees so both groups have sufficient retirement funds.
Regards,
USA320Pilot
robbedagain
Veteran
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2003
- Messages
- 11,125
- Reaction score
- 2,676
does this mean that say someone like seigel and cohen should lose their pension and be forced to pay back every dime they walked away with since they are younger than the current mgmt and the ones prior? to me that is why the employee morale is at an all time low and it will get worse if nothing is done while the employees suffer the fact that they cant retire the way they should
The looming retirement crisis in the country is not social security (no matter what you think of either political party), it is pension underfunding. And not just small underfunding, massive underfunding across industries. Over promised benefits, assumptions about stock returns made during the 90s, etc. Business Week, either this week or last weeks issue, had a long article about underfunded public sector pensions. State employees with underfunded plans don't have the safety net of the PBGC. Some states will either have to jack up taxes to fund their plans or cut a lot of services. At least the federal government can always secretly print more money to fully fund the PBGC. Some state employees might find themselves SOL someday.
TheLarkAscending
Veteran
SpinDoc said:
What a crock of nonsense. If an employee has worked their entire life for a company with the understanding that one of the benefits thereof is an established pension and suddenly news is released that the pension has been grossly underfunded because of EXECUTIVE decisions, you'd like to have us believe that questioning executive benefit compensation isn't relevant to the discussion? :huh:
Which of these parties made the conscious decision to underfund the pensions? They did not take into account market variations and economic variables, which they (as you've pointed out) were well-schooled to anticipate, are highly compensated to manage, thus should have been well prepared to supervise. You want to justify management being permitted to maintain their level of compensation because???
Expressing that retired persons should have been more vigilant and planned for mismanagement of the fund(s) is ... well, unfreakinbelievable. Irresponsibility does not lie with the retiree! You've been awarded the 'greatest tale of royal horsespin' I've ever read. (Actually, perhaps another individual on this forum deserves that award 😉 )
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- Joined
- May 18, 2003
- Messages
- 8,175
- Reaction score
- 1,539
Earlier today I commented on this week's Senate Finance Committee hearing on pension changes to support DB Plans and as I indicated, it appears the Bush Administration lead by John Snow and Andrew Card are not to sympathetic to airline employees and their pension terminations.
The Washington Post published an article titled "Pension Bill to Look a Lot Like Bush's Plan" indicating "the chairman of the House Workforce Committee and a subcommittee chairman plan to introduce a pension bill today that incorporates much of the Bush administration's proposal earlier this year but softens slightly the initial impact of some of its provisions."
Moreover, the Post wrote Rep. George Miller (Calif.), the Workforce Committee's ranking Democrat, said the bill, like Bush's plan, would rely heavily on "employee benefit cuts and billion-dollar tax hikes for employers." Such changes "would seriously undermine" the private pension system for both employees and employers, he said.
At the same time, Miller said, the "proposal fails to stop runaway pension terminations, like at United Airlines."
Thus, it appears Doug Steenland's and Jerry Grinstein's plea fell on deaf years and American, Delta, Northwest, and Continental are going to have significant pension burdens that may cause a corporate failure and judicial restructuring, unless something quickly changes.
See Story
Regards,
USA320Pilot
The Washington Post published an article titled "Pension Bill to Look a Lot Like Bush's Plan" indicating "the chairman of the House Workforce Committee and a subcommittee chairman plan to introduce a pension bill today that incorporates much of the Bush administration's proposal earlier this year but softens slightly the initial impact of some of its provisions."
Moreover, the Post wrote Rep. George Miller (Calif.), the Workforce Committee's ranking Democrat, said the bill, like Bush's plan, would rely heavily on "employee benefit cuts and billion-dollar tax hikes for employers." Such changes "would seriously undermine" the private pension system for both employees and employers, he said.
At the same time, Miller said, the "proposal fails to stop runaway pension terminations, like at United Airlines."
Thus, it appears Doug Steenland's and Jerry Grinstein's plea fell on deaf years and American, Delta, Northwest, and Continental are going to have significant pension burdens that may cause a corporate failure and judicial restructuring, unless something quickly changes.
See Story
Regards,
USA320Pilot
SpinDoc said:
It is because people willing to take their lot in life and overlook the corporate robber baron policies that we are now and have been enduring, that we are in this mess!
Having lost both my job and my pension, I will not simply "get over it" and wait till things come out in the wash. Enough is enough! :angry:
Fatherknowsbest
Advanced
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2003
- Messages
- 136
- Reaction score
- 0
I want to throw in a few thoughts to this discussion. Just what has happened to personal responsibility? I don't think highly of what has/is happening to retirement expectations of US Airways Employees. But just where has everyone been hiding for the last 10 to 16 years?
The Company has made mistake after mistake IMHO. Except for 1-3 early Wolf years, this Company has been a basket case, (since mergers of PSA & Piedmont) it has all been downhill for Company profits in those many years. Yet what I read is how as few as 10 to 20% of the workers have planned for their retirement years in any coherent way.
I have come to the conclussion that the Company did ramp and customer service employees a favor when they froze pension plans in the early 90's. Here is the problem, virtually no one chose to use this wake up call to plan for the future. Everyone (employees) on this board should have had the common sense to realize that USAir was not going to take care of everyone in retirement, even if it wanted to (and it is very clear to me that they did not).
I was a customer service employee who lived modestly and saved and planned as if I knew the only one for my family to depend was me and not the Company. Of course I did not expect everyone to take this same approach. But here again is the MAJOR problem. I worked in a Hub city with hundreds of employees who didn't have a clue what they should do about their future, so many of these decent folks decided to do nothing at all. I feel bad that so many people that I worked with are now trapped at US Airways. They cannot get other jobs because they don't have the skills or they don't believe in themselves any more. That is the tragedy of today's worker. You should have gotten your heads out of the sand and looked around long ago.
1) Did you work for a well Managed Company? No.
2) Did you work for a Company that embraced employee ideas? No.
3) Did you work for a Company that made a profit? No.
4) Did/have you planned on how to have a successful retirement? No.
5) Do you realize that if you look in the mirror, you will see who
is mostly to blame? No.
Remember this. Now that the PBGC has the pension plans, you have a choice. You don't have to stay with a Company that is morally bankrupt, and you can still get whatever pension money that is there ( I realize because of family health issues some can't leave). Even though the AWA deal may stablize things for awhile, IMHO the good days are never to return for employees past 40.
I hope that many will take advice offered by others on this board to check things out away from US Airways. Put the blame where it belongs and accept that many of you are responsble yourselves. Many of you never put money into the 401-K plan, or only the small amount that the Company would match.
(I'll just add this, the pilots were screwed royally by the Company and I am mainly talking to the other employee groups here).
There are many many fine folks that still work here. Some lucky ones are really doing what they enjoy and have the resources to stay. For me, the enjoyment was gone, and as soon as salary and benefits were cut to unreasonable levels, I left on my own terms.
I have a College degree but what I learned about finances was self taught and not learned in the class room. Too many Colleges leave out the important stuff.
Good luck everyone and remember, you look in the mirror at who is mainly responsible for your troubles - yourselves. Good Night.
The Company has made mistake after mistake IMHO. Except for 1-3 early Wolf years, this Company has been a basket case, (since mergers of PSA & Piedmont) it has all been downhill for Company profits in those many years. Yet what I read is how as few as 10 to 20% of the workers have planned for their retirement years in any coherent way.
I have come to the conclussion that the Company did ramp and customer service employees a favor when they froze pension plans in the early 90's. Here is the problem, virtually no one chose to use this wake up call to plan for the future. Everyone (employees) on this board should have had the common sense to realize that USAir was not going to take care of everyone in retirement, even if it wanted to (and it is very clear to me that they did not).
I was a customer service employee who lived modestly and saved and planned as if I knew the only one for my family to depend was me and not the Company. Of course I did not expect everyone to take this same approach. But here again is the MAJOR problem. I worked in a Hub city with hundreds of employees who didn't have a clue what they should do about their future, so many of these decent folks decided to do nothing at all. I feel bad that so many people that I worked with are now trapped at US Airways. They cannot get other jobs because they don't have the skills or they don't believe in themselves any more. That is the tragedy of today's worker. You should have gotten your heads out of the sand and looked around long ago.
1) Did you work for a well Managed Company? No.
2) Did you work for a Company that embraced employee ideas? No.
3) Did you work for a Company that made a profit? No.
4) Did/have you planned on how to have a successful retirement? No.
5) Do you realize that if you look in the mirror, you will see who
is mostly to blame? No.
Remember this. Now that the PBGC has the pension plans, you have a choice. You don't have to stay with a Company that is morally bankrupt, and you can still get whatever pension money that is there ( I realize because of family health issues some can't leave). Even though the AWA deal may stablize things for awhile, IMHO the good days are never to return for employees past 40.
I hope that many will take advice offered by others on this board to check things out away from US Airways. Put the blame where it belongs and accept that many of you are responsble yourselves. Many of you never put money into the 401-K plan, or only the small amount that the Company would match.
(I'll just add this, the pilots were screwed royally by the Company and I am mainly talking to the other employee groups here).
There are many many fine folks that still work here. Some lucky ones are really doing what they enjoy and have the resources to stay. For me, the enjoyment was gone, and as soon as salary and benefits were cut to unreasonable levels, I left on my own terms.
I have a College degree but what I learned about finances was self taught and not learned in the class room. Too many Colleges leave out the important stuff.
Good luck everyone and remember, you look in the mirror at who is mainly responsible for your troubles - yourselves. Good Night.
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- Joined
- May 18, 2003
- Messages
- 8,175
- Reaction score
- 1,539
According to a story in Wednesday’s Chicago Tribune, the possibility of United Airlines dumping its employee pension plans was raised more than a year ago by federal agencies investigating the carrier's application for a government-backed loan to help its exit from bankruptcy, Chief Executive Glenn Tilton said Tuesday. During loan negotiations, it was clear some government staffers reviewing the application "were of the view that the defined-benefit plans would have to be terminated for us to be financeable and, ultimately, viable," Tilton said.
I find it interesting that the ATSB lobbied for United to drop its DB Plans instead of seeking solutions with John Snow and Andrew Card to find alternatives to save pensions for all workers.
See Story
Also noteworthy, the AP reported today that the Republican leaders are weighing the idea of raising the social security benefit age, which would be another blow to airline and other workers.
See Story
Regards,
USA320Pilot
I find it interesting that the ATSB lobbied for United to drop its DB Plans instead of seeking solutions with John Snow and Andrew Card to find alternatives to save pensions for all workers.
See Story
Also noteworthy, the AP reported today that the Republican leaders are weighing the idea of raising the social security benefit age, which would be another blow to airline and other workers.
See Story
Regards,
USA320Pilot
USA320Pilot said:
And I find it interesting that your airline got also dumped its pensions to the PBGC, still couldn't figure out a way to make a dime and had to beg for financing and for a merger. Thanks to lower costs by dumping pension liabilities on the US Government and taxpayer, your airline because a slightly less ugly investment and will get financing from a foreign corporation backed by foreign governments in exchange for an enourmous aircraft order. :down:
Lark,
You beat me to the punch, and said it far better!
1. There are a lot of companies offering life insurance that have been in business a lot longer than most airlines. How? They actually pay attention to their actuarial tables, and they invest conservatively - i.e., they take into account their investments will have down cycles. Corporations COULD have done the same - they've got all that education, right? They COULD have managed their pension plans as if they actually meant to meet their obligations, but they didn't. Sadly, the advantage conferred by this mismanagement puts pressure on honorable institutions to cut corners, too - ahhhhhh, the marketplace at work, and an excellent case study of Gresham's Law at work. Who the he// needs regulation?
2. The government and the PBGC have known full well, for quite a while, that their funding requirements and oversight, was grossly inadequate. You have to look no further than the steel, automaker and the airline industries to have your prime facie evidence - Q.E.D.
3. You haven't seen any execs do the perp walk for pension fund mismangement, have you? What's going on isn't illegal. Proof of the collaborative mendacity, in my view. I mean, the principals have all that education, right? The KNEW what they were doing.
4. Now add a neo-Hoover administration that is hostile to DB plans, and the working class in general. With regards to the airlines, add in 9/11. The perfect storm.
If I were 20 years old, I'd go with a 401k, because the companies and the government are thieves.
But as others have pointed out, if you are 40, and have been promised a pension for 20 years, a change in mid-stream is another matter. Perhaps if you could roll over your accrued benefits into the 401k? But wait, your company has already stolen the $$$ - it's not there!
Perhaps the problem is, education is not the key ingredient to pension operations. Perhaps ethics are.
Ethics, however, seem to be optional this day and time.
My tag line says it all.
You beat me to the punch, and said it far better!
1. There are a lot of companies offering life insurance that have been in business a lot longer than most airlines. How? They actually pay attention to their actuarial tables, and they invest conservatively - i.e., they take into account their investments will have down cycles. Corporations COULD have done the same - they've got all that education, right? They COULD have managed their pension plans as if they actually meant to meet their obligations, but they didn't. Sadly, the advantage conferred by this mismanagement puts pressure on honorable institutions to cut corners, too - ahhhhhh, the marketplace at work, and an excellent case study of Gresham's Law at work. Who the he// needs regulation?
2. The government and the PBGC have known full well, for quite a while, that their funding requirements and oversight, was grossly inadequate. You have to look no further than the steel, automaker and the airline industries to have your prime facie evidence - Q.E.D.
3. You haven't seen any execs do the perp walk for pension fund mismangement, have you? What's going on isn't illegal. Proof of the collaborative mendacity, in my view. I mean, the principals have all that education, right? The KNEW what they were doing.
4. Now add a neo-Hoover administration that is hostile to DB plans, and the working class in general. With regards to the airlines, add in 9/11. The perfect storm.
If I were 20 years old, I'd go with a 401k, because the companies and the government are thieves.
But as others have pointed out, if you are 40, and have been promised a pension for 20 years, a change in mid-stream is another matter. Perhaps if you could roll over your accrued benefits into the 401k? But wait, your company has already stolen the $$$ - it's not there!
Perhaps the problem is, education is not the key ingredient to pension operations. Perhaps ethics are.
Ethics, however, seem to be optional this day and time.
My tag line says it all.
