Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Emasculation of Pilot Profession too much for PBGC?

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

habubuaza

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2001
Posts
355
U.S. Pension Insurer Is Concerned
About Terms of UAL-Pilots Pact


By SUSAN CAREY
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
December 20, 2004; Page A2

The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. said it is concerned that terms of a tentative contract UAL Corp. and its pilots union have agreed to "sets a dangerous precedent."

The quasigovernmental pension insurer is worried that the airline is making generous new pension promises while refusing to honor old pension agreements.

Last week, the United Airlines parent, which is operating in bankruptcy-court protection, reached accord with the Air Line Pilots Association on a five-year concessionary labor agreement that would give active pilots $550 million in convertible notes if they agree not to fight UAL's efforts to terminate their defined-benefit pension plan and shift that plan onto the PBGC. The shift is expected to sharply reduce the pension benefits of many active and retired pilots.

Bradley Belt, the PBGC's executive director, said it will "scrutinize the agreement very closely and take all appropriate steps to protect the financial interests" of the underfunded agency, which guarantees 31,000 private-sector defined-benefit pension plans.

Mr. Belt said one troublesome aspect of the tentative labor agreement, which will go to a ratification vote by United's 6,600 pilots next month, is that the pilots are insisting that three other pension plans covering other United workers and retirees also be terminated. "The company and the pilots' union have no authority to force other workers and the PBGC to accept the termination of those plans," he said.

The tentative agreement would require the pilots to take a 15% pay cut, which would help provide UAL with an estimated $180 million to $190 million in annual savings. The carrier is seeking a total of $725 million in worker givebacks and intends to terminate the four pension plans covering 123,000 active and retired workers, for further savings of about $639 million a year. As part of the plan, UAL's 8,300 salaried and management workers will serve up $112 million in annual savings starting Jan. 1. These economies are intended to help UAL build a business plan that could attract $2 billion in fresh financing so it can step out of Chapter 11 next year.

If employees don't voluntarily agree to concessions, UAL will ask the bankruptcy judge next month to annul existing labor contracts and impose terms on the workers. The company also intends to prove to the judge that it wouldn't survive outside Chapter 11 if it maintains the costly, underfunded pension plans, and thus must shift those obligations to the PBGC. UAL would then create cheaper defined-contribution retirement plans for its current workers.

UAL, under terms of the new accord, would contribute 15% of the pilots' pay into 401(k)-type plans. The convertible notes, which would be issued to the pilots association after the company emerges from Chapter 11, could be sold in the capital markets to cover a portion of the pension losses for the active pilots. The 6,000 retired pilots wouldn't share in that incentive, which is calculated to make the tentative agreement palatable to the active pilots.

Write to Susan Carey at [email protected]
 
They don't give a hoot about the pilot profession. They just don't want to have a whole bunch of obligations dumped on them.
 
yeah, if the ATSB would have done their job. How about UAL management?
 
Went to a meeting of retirees where a rep from the PBGC spoke. The guy was amazingly uninformed ( don't know why he even bothered to show up ), but did say that if you took a lump sum, they considered you "paid in full"...you'd get nothing from them if your plan dumped and you didn't get the other 50%...have a nice life. It's something to think about.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top