Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
U.S. Government To Take Over United's Pensions  
User currently offlineNWAFA From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1893 posts, RR: 15
Posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3235 times:

Reuters
US to Assume United Airlines Pension Plan
Friday March 11, 11:53 am ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. agency that backs corporate pensions on Friday said it was moving to take over United Airlines' pension plan for ground employees, saying the plan operated by the bankrupt airline was only 30 percent funded.

The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. said it would guarantee payment of an estimated $2.1 billion in benefits out of the plan's $2.9 billion shortfall. The plan has more than 36,000 active and retired employees, the agency said. UAL Corp. (OTC CTA (Switzerland)">BB:UALAQ.OB - News) is the parent company of United Airlines.

A PBGC spokesman said the agency was petitioning in federal district court to take over the ground employees plan.

"The decision to end a plan is never an easy one," PBGC's director Bradley Belt said in a statement. But the agency also needed to protect itself against more losses, he said.

The PBGC is itself in the red, with a $23 billion deficit. By moving to assume United's plan now, the agency said it saved itself at least $225 million in extra losses.

The United plan had only $1.2 billion in assets to cover $4.1 billion in benefit promises, and the company has missed $363 million in legally required contributions, the PBGC said.

It noted that United's management had repeatedly stated its intention to terminate the plan. United says it needs to replace its pension plans to exit bankruptcy.

United said it was reviewing the PBGC's actions and evaluating its options.


THANK YOU FOR FLYING NORTHWEST AIRLINES, WE TRULY APPRECIATE YOUR BUSINESS!
29 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineNWAFA From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1893 posts, RR: 15
Reply 1, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3230 times:

U..A. is still abusing the Bankruptcy process. The U.S Government should have changed the corporate BK laws yesterday instead of the personal laws.

So now we the tax payers get to pay for this! Before anyone starts with the "its the pension program that pays crap", we the tax payers pay into the Government Pension program.



THANK YOU FOR FLYING NORTHWEST AIRLINES, WE TRULY APPRECIATE YOUR BUSINESS!
User currently offlineAA7573E From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 475 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3230 times:

Yet another example of the shameless abuse of the system by United. If you can't fix it in 2 plus years, it's a likely conclusion that it is broken beyond repair. Virtually any company could operate comfortably under BK protection for an infinite amount of time, however, the intent of BK legislation was to provide a reasonable amount of time for a company to get its house in order, and make a return to the market. Chapter 7 liquidation was created for companies that can not make it, after completing the Chapter 11 process. Both US and United are examples of extreme abuse of this system, at taxpayer expense. I don't care how much you like United and enjoy flying them, there is no rational argument supporting their abuse of the system.

Hopefully their continued abuse of the system will draw some attention from the legislature, and we can get some positive change to our corporate BK laws. In fact, I am quite surprised that senators from Texas, Georgia, Florida, Washington, Minnesota, and other states that have major airline hubs, have yet to bring this issue up in session. They usually lobby very hard for legislation that supports their 'home state carrier(s)', yet not one of them has raised a finger to point out the abuse that is being carried out by one of their 'home state carrier('s)' largest competitors.

United's abuse of the system will be a case study for many business school students in the near future. Perhaps the case will be called, "How to take a successful dominate airline, run it into the ground, and steal money from the taxpayers while you pretend to make it viable again."



See you up front!
User currently offlineOzarkD9S From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 5049 posts, RR: 21
Reply 3, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3228 times:

As a taxpayer I don't mind that the government protects the pensions of retirees, or the needy or uninsured etc...PROMOTE THE GENERAL WELFARE!

If the government is willing to do away with social security and medicare why shouldn't UA be able to do the same? It's a brand new heartless world out there.



Next Up: STL-LGA-RIC-ATL-STL
User currently offlineNWAFA From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1893 posts, RR: 15
Reply 4, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3228 times:

And with the current dope in the white house is not worker friendly and only corporation friendly, you will keep seeing raping going on from the corporations to the employees. Screw the employee long live the company is W's motto


THANK YOU FOR FLYING NORTHWEST AIRLINES, WE TRULY APPRECIATE YOUR BUSINESS!
User currently offlineOzarkD9S From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 5049 posts, RR: 21
Reply 5, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3227 times:

Amen NWAFA, welcome to my RUL!

Wake me in Nov 08.



Next Up: STL-LGA-RIC-ATL-STL
User currently offline7E72004 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3587 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3228 times:

In other words, it is us (taxpayers) who have to pay for United's abuse of the bankruptcy process...that is bull$hit!  mad 


The next generation of aircraft is just around the corner!
User currently offlineNWAFA From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1893 posts, RR: 15
Reply 7, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3227 times:

7E72004,

The hard working employees of UA have paid the most, and now we the rest of the country get to pay some too.



THANK YOU FOR FLYING NORTHWEST AIRLINES, WE TRULY APPRECIATE YOUR BUSINESS!
User currently offline7E72004 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3587 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3227 times:

I think it is wrong...UA has abused the process to a point where they should be "kicked out." I should not have to pay for someone else's mistake.


The next generation of aircraft is just around the corner!
User currently offlineAdh214 From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 360 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 3227 times:

"We the taxpayer's get pay for this."

Whatever, would you prefer for UA to tell there 36,000 employees and retirees "tough luck no more pension checks." Grandma might be a little upset that she will be spending her last days eating dog food in poverty.

If you don't want the PBGS to be in place to protect your pension and mine that is a separate conversation. United is just using the system that is in place. I feel a lot better about my pension because the PBGC backs a portion of it.

Andrew


User currently offline7E72004 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3587 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 3227 times:

If the government wants to start down this road, then i think it is only fair to let airlines consolidate.


The next generation of aircraft is just around the corner!
User currently offlineStevenUhl777 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 3226 times:

I'll bet Mariner is going to rip me a new a-hole for this post, but here goes anyway:


According to the article:
The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. said it would guarantee payment of an estimated $2.1 billion in benefits out of the plan's $2.9 billion shortfall

The PBGC is itself in the red, with a $23 billion deficit. By moving to assume United's plan now, the agency said it saved itself at least $225 million in extra losses

Ok...let me see if I understand this government logic in this whole issue.

* United first applied to the ATSB for a $2B loan guarantee. Upon review, the ATSB said the business model and $'s weren't realistic, and the request was denied.

* United then reworked it's application, lowered the request to $1.6B and modified it's analysis and business plan. The ATSB again reviewed it, cited its faults, and once again, denied the request for the logan guarantee.

* Facing it's last time up to bat after the ATSB "invited" United to resubmit its request, United once again lowered it's request down to $1.1B. This time, it wasn't so much the #'s were off base, but the ATSB determined that United was doing so well all of a sudden, that United didn't NEED a loan gurantee. 3rd time...request denied. ATSB closes shop for good, UAL must now to turn to other options. Dubya is happy becuase he didn't approve a $1B loan guarantee backed by the government.

Fast forward to today. Now, the US Government plans to take over $2.1B in pensions for ground employees.

What am I missing here? First, the government denies the original ATSB request for $2B, as well as subsequent requests, thinking it's saving the taxpayers money.

But wait! Now the government is willing to back United's pensions, valued at $2.1B? So the government really didn't save anything at all in the end, did they?


User currently offlineSupa7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 3209 times:

Remind me to go get a union job so I can bargain for a fat pension nobody else gets. Then when it bankrupts my company, remind me to transfer that ill-gotten sacred cow to the U.S. government. That way, I will have guaranteed retirement even though I didn't merit it on the job market. Thanks.

User currently offlineFriendlySkies From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 4105 posts, RR: 5
Reply 13, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 3181 times:

I don't think a lot of you have read this correctly. UA didn't move to eliminate them yet, the PBGC is moving to take them over. In other words, PBGC wants this right now, UA would probably prefer to wait.

This is good for UA and it's employees, even though it seems bad. It will give UA a better chance at survival (with $2.1 billion less debt) and let the 36,000 employees covered keep their jobs and most of their retirement. They aren't losing their pension, they're just not getting everything they expected. It's not great, but it's better than nothing.

UA isn't abusing anything. They're taking advantage of a system set up many years ago, and following the rules.


User currently offlineFriendlySkies From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 4105 posts, RR: 5
Reply 14, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 3166 times:

Quoting NWAFA (Reply 1):
So now we the tax payers get to pay for this! Before anyone starts with the "its the pension program that pays crap", we the tax payers pay into the Government Pension program.

http://www.thestreet.com/_forbes/sto...m_ven=FORBES&cm_cat=FREE&cm_ite=NA

"...Although it is a federal corporation, the PBGC receives no tax revenue. Instead, it functions like an insurance company, receiving premiums from companies with defined-benefit pension plans."


User currently offlineAA7573E From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 475 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 3155 times:

I would rather UA go out of business than have the burden of supporting their retirees fall upon me. The PBGC receives Federal money, not directly from tax revenue, but in appropriations - which come from taxes revenue. Call it what you want.

It is not our job to support 36,000 people who work for a broke company. It is unfortunate that they are in BK, but they are. If they can not come out, I feel no responsibility to support their family. I have enough to do in order to support mine. It's all part of a market economy. You win some and you lose some. They, it seems, are losing one, and taking it from you and me on the way out the door.



See you up front!
User currently offlineKabAir From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 245 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 3133 times:

Ozark D9S said: "If the government is willing to do away with social security and medicare why shouldn't UA be able to do the same? It's a brand new heartless world out there."

Huh, last I checked "W" actually started one of the biggest government entitlements ever with this new monster Medicare perscription deal-e-o. And as far as I can tell, Social Security still exists and will continue to exist. Well, actually if Dems get their druthers it won't exist by the time I'm 65 (according to what THEY told me 5-10 years ago before they suddenly become so pro-current system without any explanation). Someone still has yet to explain to me WHY - if Dems are so caring about our seniors - Mr. Clinton in 1993 SIGNIFICANTLY RAISED taxes on social security recipients. Ah, but what do I know. I'm just a "dumb red state redneck"  Smile

Supa 7E7 said: "Remind me to go get a union job so I can bargain for a fat pension nobody else gets. Then when it bankrupts my company, remind me to transfer that ill-gotten sacred cow to the U.S. government. That way, I will have guaranteed retirement even though I didn't merit it on the job market. Thanks."

Man, I'm with you. The high majority of employers don't even offer pensions in the first place.... Welcome to America - land of the free (ride), home of entitlements.



wow, there sure are a lot of expert economists on this forum....
User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25079 posts, RR: 85
Reply 17, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 3113 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Steven:

Rip you a new one? I didn't think I'd been that tough on you.  Smile

I think they (the ATSB and the PBGC) are two separate issues and I am amazed that you are still confused about the role of the ATSB.

However, it would seem the ATSB was right. United keeps on losing money, and they are fast running out of excuses.

So I am struck by the difference between United and Jetsgo. United seeks bk protection, continues operating and continues losing money - billions.

Jetsgo seeks bankruptcy protection, stops operating and stops losing money.

Guess which side I am on.

cheers

mariner

[Edited 2005-03-11 22:51:23]


aeternum nauta
User currently offlineF9Animal From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 5025 posts, RR: 28
Reply 18, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 3105 times:

Why can't the governement force UA to sell some of its assets to pay the pension fund? How many planes could UA sell to take care of its responsiblities? Seems like UA wants to throw the responsibility on the tax payers. I think it is time for the Bankruptcy judge to force UA to either s**t or get off the pot.

I am sickened at watching the employees of the airline getting hit over the head repeatedly.

I don't want to see UA go under, but I also don't want to support poor business decisions either.



I Am A Different Animal!!
User currently offlineBennett123 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 7526 posts, RR: 3
Reply 19, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 3070 times:

How long has the fund had a 70% deficit for.

I think that the key questions are who knew what and when did they know it?.


User currently offlineLTBEWR From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13073 posts, RR: 12
Reply 20, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 3047 times:

The PBGC exists to protect to some extent the pensions of workers of companies that cannot be continued for reasons beyond any fault of their own by their current or former employer. It makes sure that monies that were put in good faith between the employer and the employees are there when the employee gets to retirement.
What I wish was that the PBGC would require that high executives would have to sacrafice the contributions to their pensions to those of the line workers.
Times and businesses change. Only a few businesses last more that a few years. The Airline business has radically changed. The idea of pensions is becoming obsolete for many reasons. For many, their pension is the difference between a modest retirement and poverty. Their children cannot be expected to always cover their parent's retirement needs for a variety of reasons. That is why we have a PBGC.


User currently offline7e72004 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3587 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 3045 times:

AA7573E--I completely agree with you. I am single right now but i have enough on my plate than to have my tax money used for this purpose. The management should be fired, and the airline should be liquidated. ENough is enough.


The next generation of aircraft is just around the corner!
User currently offline7E72004 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3587 posts, RR: 2
Reply 22, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 3042 times:

and you can't tell me that it takes 2.5 years (and counting) for a company to get out of bankruptch; there is no reason why UA could not have been through the process.


The next generation of aircraft is just around the corner!
User currently offlineODwyerPW From Mexico, joined Dec 2004, 851 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 3014 times:

Gee,
I run a small company. Wonder if I could get the Gov't to fund a pension plan for my guys? Gotta love the corporate well fare.



Quiero una vida simple en Mexico. Nada mas.
User currently offlineScotron11 From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 1178 posts, RR: 3
Reply 24, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2955 times:

The PBGC is being prudent. Just like it was when it moved to take over UAL's pilots scheme in December. The thing is, UAL is still there operating under court protection, and that protection is pretty extensive.

The full PBGC guarantee on the pilots pension didn't kick in until May this year, and UAL agreed with their pilots that they wouldn't terminate it until then. But by May, the full guarantee would have cost the PBGC an additional $140M, so that was why they moved to take it over.

That issue is still before the bankruptcy judge.

These issues aside, I have still to learn of any "concrete" plan by UAL to get out of this "thing". You would think they at least could have filed a reorganization plan with the court by now, stating when and under what conditions they will exit bankruptcy.


25 Kanebear : Welcome to politics. Retirees vote in greater numbers than younger demographic groups. Thus, save their pensions, get their vote. This is oversimplifi
26 StevenUhl777 : Yes I can. Before 2002, United has been in business, following different variations of the same business model for decades. A combination of factors
27 Gigneil : Its very clear that almost nobody here understands the role of the PBGC. If United were to have gone completely out of business, the PBGC would have s
28 MaverickM11 : "And with the current dope in the white house is not worker friendly and only corporation friendly, you will keep seeing raping going on from the corp
29 Post contains images Mariner : Steven: Yes, I knew you were being facetious. A wee bit, so was I. As to the ATSB, your info is a little off. Several other airlines applied and were
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
United To Take Over KIX-HNL And Possibly IAD-NRT posted Fri Dec 20 2002 18:05:28 by UA744Flagship
Arkia Israeli To Take Over Axis Airways posted Wed Nov 8 2006 15:19:26 by LY777
Compass To Take Over Independence Certificate posted Tue Mar 28 2006 17:41:18 by NKMCO
Gulf Air To Take Over Management Of BAH posted Fri Jan 20 2006 00:15:26 by GF-A330
WN To Take Over TZ? posted Thu Oct 20 2005 22:21:37 by KensukeAida
GOL To Take Over Southern Winds? posted Fri Aug 5 2005 10:56:04 by EZEIZA
Air Asia To Take Over Some Of MH's Domestic Routes posted Tue Jun 28 2005 17:18:26 by SQuared
ASA/Comair To Take Over CO Express Ops @ CRW posted Thu Jun 2 2005 13:58:15 by CRWDude
MIA To Take Over North Terminal Construction posted Fri May 27 2005 15:46:37 by DB777
SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s posted Thu May 26 2005 19:24:56 by ConcordeBoy