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

The End Of Pensions

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

Dennis Miller

What about my Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2003
Posts
200
The End Of Pensions
Dan Ackman, 05.11.05, 8:35 AM ET

NEW YORK - In the future, will any company offer a pension? The answer is probably not, and the future is getting closer all the time.

Yesterday a U.S. federal bankruptcy judge approved a plan by UAL, the parent company of United Airlines, to transfer its pension plans, which are underfunded by $9.8 billion, to the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp., which is itself underfunded.

UAL's move is expected to spur similar actions by other so-called legacy carriers among the airlines, which are squeezed by high costs, competition from airlines without substantial pension obligations and, lately, by rising fuel costs.

More broadly, UAL's action takes place against a looming retirement crisis in which the relatively benign problems of the Social Security system are just a part (see "Retirement Doomsday").

The decline of pensions is likely well past the tipping point already. No so long ago, the defined benefit pension--guaranteed retirement income--was a prevalent aspect of the U.S. financial scene. But no more. In 1980, 38% of Americans had a defined benefit pension as their primary retirement plan. By 1997, just 21% of Americans had such plans, according to the Pension Benefits Council. That percentage is certainly lower now, and more and more plans have been passed off to the PBGC, a federal agency that insures pensions, but which does not necessarily pay the benefits retirees expected.

The ratio of active to inactive workers in existing defined benefit pension plans has fallen to roughly 1-to-1, down from more than 3.5-to-1 in 1980, according to the PBGC. This retirement math is starker than that faced by the Social Security system. The PBGC now pays the pensions of more than 1 million retirees.

While many more workers now have retirement savings plans such as 401(k)s, relatively few have sufficient assets to fund their retirements in a way that will maintain all or most of their pre-retirement incomes.

United's unions are preparing to fight the decision made by the company and permitted by the bankruptcy court, and they have threatened to strike. But with the defined pensions now a decidedly minority benefit, their partial loss is not likely to resonate politically or among United's customers.

More likely, the court's decision will encourage other airlines to follow suit. US Airways Group, which, like UAL, is in bankruptcy, terminated the last of its pension plans earlier this year. Yesterday, Delta Air Lines said it might have to seek bankruptcy protection, too, adding that it expected a significant loss for 2005. The airline industry already has the second-most beneficiaries of any industry covered by the PBGC guaranties. Steel is by far the first. Unlike steel, however, the airline industry is not in a long-term slide in terms of total employment, despite its financial troubles over the past several years.

The PBGC guarantees corporate pension plans and pays benefits to retirees when company plans fail. When it takes over a plan, it receives its assets as well as its liabilities, and also collects insurance premiums from the plans it guarantees. So far, the agency has been able to meet its obligations, but currently it faces a $23.3 billion deficit between its assets and long-term liabilities. The takeover of the UAL pension plan is already factored in that number. Overall, it backstops the pensions of 44.3 million beneficiaries.

The bankruptcy court frees UAL from $3 billion in pension contributions over the next five years. But the shortfall between its pension plan assets and its liabilities is much greater, nearly $10 billion, according to PBGC estimates.

It is not immediately clear which beneficiaries will be paid less and by how much. The PBGC's maximum guaranteed benefit is adjusted yearly. This year, the maximum paid to most retirees is $45,614 for a 65-year-old, so those who are now due more or who retire earlier would be paid less.

UAL says unloading its pensions is critical to obtaining the $2 billion or more in debt financing it needs to get out of bankruptcy. However necessary, in a world where employer-paid pensions are increasingly rare, unloading pension obligations is likely to become increasingly common.
 
Dennis Miller said:
The PBGC's maximum guaranteed benefit is adjusted yearly. This year, the maximum paid to most retirees is $45,614 for a 65-year-old, so those who are now due more or who retire earlier would be paid less.

Will the United pilot group push ALPA to change the Age 60 rule for this reason?
 
I believe for someone retiring at Age 60, the guarantee is in the $23,000 range.
 
FlyChicaga said:
I believe for someone retiring at Age 60, the guarantee is in the $23,000 range.

The maximum that can be collected from the PBGC for someone retiring at age 60 is $28,851.11. There has been legislation introduced that would eliminate the PBGC "early" retirement penalty for airline pilots. Should this pass, the maximum would be $44,386.32.
 
Originally posted by canyonblue
Will the United pilot group push ALPA to change the Age 60 rule for this reason?

The United pilot group doesn't need to push ALPA to try to change the Age 60 rule. ALPA has already announced their official support for the repeal of the Age 60 rule, and is lobbying to effect the change.
 
Last edited:
Let's scrap our pension tomorrow and just ask for a pay raise or better B plan. If you get me my money now, I promise I'll be responsible and won't starve when I'm 65. If you keep the money to "help" and "protect" me from myself, you have already proven how easy it is to scr&w me over.

Take our pension input per year, divide it by the number of pilots, and give up 90% of that NOW. You save 10%, and we have control.

My heart goes out to the United folks. That's the shot across the bow for the rest of us. What are we going to do now?
 
Last edited:
I like the way you're thinking Albie. No way ALPA goes for it, though. I feel the same way about Social Security. Drop my Soc Sec taxes, let me keep it, and get out of the way.
 
I wonder what the dollar amount would be, Albie. . . any idea? Or what the company's contribution is as a percentage of annual pay.
 
canyonblue said:
Will the United pilot group push ALPA to change the Age 60 rule for this reason?

Sen. Dan Inyoye from Hawaii is trying to address that in Congress with a bill for Airline employees (both Hawaii airlines have been in Chap 11) to allow them to get age 65 benefits if they retire at 60, since Airline pilots cannot go to 60. As far as the age 60 rule, the Supreme Court backed up that rule last week, thank gawd.


Bye Bye--General Lee
 
KC-10 Driver said:
The United pilot group doesn't need to push ALPA to try to change the Age 60 rule. ALPA has already announced their official support for the repeal of the Age 60 rule, and is lobbying to effect the change.


Huh? I think the airline poles favored NOT extending the rule.


Bye Bye--General Lee
 
General Lee said:
Huh? I think the airline poles favored NOT extending the rule.

Has ALPA annouced the results of their age 60 survey? I'd certaily like to hear how it turned out.

My local, we are Teamsters, polled our pilots and the results were 76% to 24% in favor of keeping the current rule.
 
AlbieF15 said:
Let's scrap our pension tomorrow and just ask for a pay raise or better B plan. If you get me my money now, I promise I'll be responsible and won't starve when I'm 65. If you keep the money to "help" and "protect" me from myself, you have already proven how easy it is to scr&w me me over.

MAGNUM!! said:
I like the way you're thinking Albie. No way ALPA goes for it, though.
ALPA did go for it. That's exactly what will happen at Hawaiian under just approved contract if a new retirement plan is not agreed to prior to January 1, 2008. At that time, the current DB plan will be frozen and replaced by a DC plan that requires the company to pay an amount equal to 17% of the pilot payroll.
 
I gotta better idea

Albie, I'll do you one better. Let's all tell our management to quit paying us at all. No one gets paid by the company. "He's crazy you say" BUT, then WE get to stand at the door when the pax unload and collect our "Flight crew fees". Let's make it $5.00 per hour for each passenger for the captain, $3.00 per hour for the F/O. That is $8.00 per passenger for a flight from Cleveland to chicago. Heck, most people tip their taxi drivers five bucks for the trip to the airport.
The airline can charge their normal price for tickets minus the pilot salary and benefit costs and pass that HUGE savings (sarcasm) off to the passenger.
Let's do the math for a plane that carries, say, 140 passengers

For the Captain.....5 x 140= $700.00 for the flight ($420.00 for the F/O)

Now let's assume the crew does four legs per day....$2800.00 per day for the captain...and he works 15 days per month.....that's $42,000 per month for the captain and $25,200 per month for the f/o.

I'd take that and pay my own taxes, invest my own money for retirement, pay my own medical.....

WHO"S WITH ME?.....C'Mon, let's go....AAHHHH!
 
DIAMONDDD said:
Albie, I'll do you one better. Let's all tell our management to quit paying us at all. No one gets paid by the company. "He's crazy you say" BUT, then WE get to stand at the door when the pax unload and collect our "Flight crew fees". Let's make it $5.00 per hour for each passenger for the captain, $3.00 per hour for the F/O. That is $8.00 per passenger for a flight from Cleveland to chicago. Heck, most people tip their taxi drivers five bucks for the trip to the airport.
The airline can charge their normal price for tickets minus the pilot salary and benefit costs and pass that HUGE savings (sarcasm) off to the passenger.
Let's do the math for a plane that carries, say, 140 passengers

For the Captain.....5 x 140= $700.00 for the flight ($420.00 for the F/O)

Now let's assume the crew does four legs per day....$2800.00 per day for the captain...and he works 15 days per month.....that's $42,000 per month for the captain and $25,200 per month for the f/o.

I'd take that and pay my own taxes, invest my own money for retirement, pay my own medical.....

WHO"S WITH ME?.....C'Mon, let's go....AAHHHH!
.
.
.
So what are all of you offline jumpseaters going to pay us??
.
.
.
 
ALPA has already announced their official support for the repeal of the Age 60 rule, and is lobbying to effect the change.


Where did you read that?

Everyone,

Please correct me if I'm wrong -- and I might be...

I could have sworn I got one of those mass ALPA emails (I am a furloughed ALPA member), which was a letter signed by Duane Woerth stating ALPA's support of the repeal of the age 60 rule.

I wish I had saved the email.

Someone please correct me if I am jumping the gun on this?!
 
-Driver: Yes I think you are. They haven't announced the results of the survey nor have they "endorsed" any particular change to their support of the status quo.

At least to my knowledge.

FJ
 

Latest resources

Back
Top