32LT10 said:
Glad to have a NWA management sympathizer here. There must be at least one in a crowd. However, the article does not mention one thing about NWA keeping the plan at the minimum. It appears that NWA illegaly took funds from the plan and then used BK to keep them from paying those adjustment payments. If they said they were taking $10 and putting it into the retirement account, yet they were only putting in $5 and spending the other $5 that is siphoning. Call it what you wish it is bad practice and NWA should be held accountable.
If you want to bring up the UAL pension issue then go right ahead. let's here your spin. The UAL pension was handed over to the PBGC at the regular funding levels, minus the stopped payments. Of which UAL said they were stopping the payments and did not keep it a secret. It appears NWA was using the funds from the pension plan without telling anyone and they got caught.
But please defend the management at NWA. They need all the friends they can get. I feel bad for the employees in this matter as they are the ones that get shafted. However, you seem to like the management types. Bet you are holding your breath on the Ken Lay trial for an acquital.
glad to see we have an irrational boob here. where am i defending nwa mgmt?
i simply stated you added a "commentary" to the story that was different than what the story says. if mgmt withheld partial contributions to the plan, as you claim - do you have a thing called proof, then they will be found guilty and the irs will put a lien on nwa assets. i do not know where you get that i am a mgmt stooge.
the comment regarding united and us airways was to show they dumped their pensions also. putting in nothing to the plan and dumping is also "siphoning" according to your definition, they're simply siphoning (using your definition) ALL of the contribution that was needed to put in.
and no they were not at the "regular" funding levels. but since you know so much, tell me what a "regular" funding level is? if they were at the "regular" funding level the pbgc would not need to be involved you f'ing dolt. i'm sure the united/us airways pilots/flight attendants/ground workers are happy they had pensions at "regular" funding levels since they're getting squat now.
the pension plan is a SEPARATE legal entity from NWA. you cannot simply goto the plan and "take" money from it. withholding contributions is a completely different manner. "siphon" means to take something that was already there (a la siphoning gas), not withholding. the ONLY way to get money back from a pension plan is to terminated the plan and have excess assets (something NWA does not have).
my guess is NWA used some pretty liberal assumptions used in valuing the plans liabilities, which would then drive the liabilities down, hence driving contributions down. the govt, p-i-s-s-e-d off that the pbgc has become a dumping ground, has chosen to make a point with them. media jumps on the "story" and sensationalizes it, which is just what the government wants. bottom line: NWA ees pensions are no "better" than united or us airways ees, they'll unfortunately be getting pbgc min guranteed benefits.
but then again, mr. know it all, can you even TELL me HOW a pension plan is funded? what about the "contributions" and when they are due? can they be "late"? any penalties associated with that? etc etc.
please listen (since you wanted to "here" my opinion).
TC
