United Airlines wants to just 'Forget' Pension Promise.....

[LEX]

Having traveled extensively in the CIS since 1989, might I suggest  that the Russian pensioners who had their life savings destroyed when the ruble was revalued believed with some merit that they had lost a vested right that was owned as if it were property.  (By the way, the Soviets in the 1980's Perisroika, as well as throughout the Soviet rule did have savings and they were able to invest, albiet very limited compared to our standards.) The breach of promise is the same regardless of jurisdiction.  The fall of Soviet Russia should be instructive to those who presume that massive and sudden economic and political displacement can not occur in the United States.

 

[unclemick]

Hmmm

In the words of that legendary investment guru(right up there with Yogi) - what do you want in an Alabama linebacker?

'agile, mobile, and hostile'.

 

[LEX]

I wish that UAL would ask themselves "What would Bear Bryant do?" before they pulled the carpet out from the thousands commitments that were behind each pension.  There are stories behind each pension, lives spent, and now depreciated as if they were disposable.  What is the value of a life spent in service to an employer?  Each of these pensioners and their families are now in a position of betrayed trust. 

From a legal stand point, I wonder if the UAL and similar retirees have standing to sue under a theory of fraud to obtain services without payment? The big story, in my opinion, is the corporate and political moral vacuum that allows this to occur.   

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Hmmm

In the words of that legendary investment guru(right up there with Yogi) - what do you want in an Alabama linebacker?

'agile, mobile, and hostile'.

Amen, Brother Mick...

Although, if I'm a father in 'Bama, I'll add "...Not fertile..."

 

[Mr._johngalt]

I wish that UAL would ask themselves "What would Bear Bryant do?" before they pulled the carpet out from the thousands commitments that were behind each pension.  There are stories behind each pension, lives spent, and now depreciated as if they were disposable.  What is the value of a life spent in service to an employer?  Each of these pensioners and their families are now in a position of betrayed trust. 

From a legal stand point, I wonder if the UAL and similar retirees have standing to sue under a theory of  fraud to obtain services without payment? The big story, in my opinion, is the corporate and political moral vacuum that allows this to occur.   

HI LEX. A suit would be a waste of time. All the rules change once a
company goes into bankruptcy. Once again, Martha can confirm this.

JG

 

[BUM]

Lifetime pensions are dying (faster than the receipients). Portable plans like 401(k), SEP, etc. are replacing them everywhere. Yell, fight, whine, vote, don't vote, thats the megatrend.


BUM

 

[unclemick]

In contrast to Bear Bryant's agile linebacker - more PC - Thomas L. Friedman has popped out - 'The World is Flat---' this year(previous of 'Lexus and The Olive Tree') - portability of pensions is also in there

On the short list for my birthday - unless someone here reads it and gives a bad book report.

 

[LEX]

JG:

You are right in the general rule. Judgement creditors are placed into the order of payment with general obligations. However, in the event of fraud a court may set BK protections aside and allow unusual equitable remedies. Lex

 

[sgeeeee]

Lifetime pensions are dying (faster than the receipients). Portable plans like 401(k), SEP, etc. are replacing them everywhere. Yell, fight, whine, vote, don't vote, thats the megatrend. 

To me this sounds a little bit like, "Safe neighborhoods are dying (faster than the perverts). Pedophiles, crack heads and murders are replacing them everywhere. Yell, fight, whine, vote, don't vote, that's the megatrend.

 

[saluki9]

I wish that UAL would ask themselves "What would Bear Bryant do?" before they pulled the carpet out from the thousands commitments that were behind each pension. There are stories behind each pension, lives spent, and now depreciated as if they were disposable. What is the value of a life spent in service to an employer? Each of these pensioners and their families are now in a position of betrayed trust.

From a legal stand point, I wonder if the UAL and similar retirees have standing to sue under a theory of fraud to obtain services without payment? The big story, in my opinion, is the corporate and political moral vacuum that allows this to occur.

Where would you suggest UAL get's the money to pay for these pensions? They can't afford them!

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

How about sell everything, liquidate the business, and put the money towards the pension fund?

 

[LEX]

Its never that simple in an ongoing corporation. UAL has cash flow and pays its bond service.  There could be at least a pay back program over time or some future trigger to make these retirees at least partially whole rather than total expungement of the pension commitment.    (Yes, I know that will never happen.  The old adage that a thief can make more money running a bank rather than robbing one rings true with corporations as well)

 

[sgeeeee]

Where would you suggest UAL get's the money to pay for these pensions?  They can't afford them! 

I haven't seen the balance sheets. Maybe you have. What can they afford? What other creditors are being told there's not enough money and how much are they losing? Can they afford the planes? the $10 per person meals? the executive salaries and perks?

I don't understand how so many people can buy into the fact that it is the pilot's pensions that there's not enough money for. Or buy into the idea that pensions are obsolete so we might as well let companies renig on them. I think exorbitant salaries for incompetent executives are obsolete. Companies should just stop paying them. And if there's not enough money for the pension, surely there's not enough money for the salaries of the folks who f#cked up the pension investments.

 

[unclemick]

Your place in line - and who gets anything - is determined by the existing body of law governing such things - fair or unfair.

 

[BUM]

Auh Jaaaaa...


BUM

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Woo hoo Bum...CH is going on a while tonight?

 

[steinj]

Looks like many heavy industries are dying on the vine - cars, planes, steel etc. One view on GM is that they will get a government bail out because it would be cheaper than having to bail out the pension plan (aka United Airlines x10) if they go belly up. JoJo

 

[Spanky]

I think exorbitant salaries for incompetent executives are obsolete. Companies should just stop paying them. And if there's not enough money for the pension, surely there's not enough money for the salaries of the folks who f#cked up the pension investments.

I agree. My wife works for this company. The CEO makes too much money that it's simply ridiculous. How many workers could be supported by William W. McGuire's $42,802,127 pay package?

42 Nobel prize winners
128 average university presidents
107 U.S. presidents
190 AFL-CIO presidents
396 Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
1677 average workers
3,995 minimum-wage earners

 

[sgeeeee]

Your place in line - and who gets anything - is determined by the existing body of law governing such things - fair or unfair.

Well . . . kind of. There are laws and there is the interpretation of the laws by the courts. I think it is the interpretation that is at issue here. This is not a simple case where you read the laws and say, "Yep, it says here in paragraph 6 that it's legal to screw the pilots and let everyone else go free." There are plenty of people with legal training that believe there is another interpretation of the law that should be made. But even if that were not true, the laws are made by government, and the government is voted on by us. We are ultimately responsible when injustice becomes part of the legal process. Acceptance of grossly unfair laws or rulings is irresponsible.

 

[Mr._johngalt]

I agree. My wife works for this company. The CEO makes too much money that it's simply ridiculous. How many workers could be supported by William W. McGuire's $42,802,127 pay package?

42 Nobel prize winners
128 average university presidents
107 U.S. presidents
190 AFL-CIO presidents
396 Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
1677 average workers
3,995 minimum-wage earners

I disagree completely. Mr. McQuire (assuming he broke no laws)
is entitled to every penny, and I don't give a flying *+###@
how many others could be supported on the money. Completely
irrelevant in a capitalist system.

JG

 

[Mr._johngalt]

government is voted on by us.  We are ultimately responsible when injustice becomes part of the legal process. 

I accept no "responsibility". I don't vote and thus the government is
making law and promoting injustice without my support.

JG

 

[Mr._johngalt]

This is mostly for LEX. Fraud is very hard to prove. As for me, I always come down on the side of the corporations vs. government.
Maybe that's because I owned and ran a few companies. I think the deeper reason is that I have no fear of any corporation messing up my life.
Now, the government (talking all levels here) can and does, daily.
I am not even bothered by the "proven" corporate crimes.
I believe about half of the convictions/prosecutions were wrong
(thinking Martha S. here - there are others). Compared to what is
foisted on us by the government (for our own good don't you know?)
corporate misdeeds are a speck in the galaxy. And, BTW,
if I did vote, the four (4) Gs would work just fine for me if
the GOP would stick to them. Limp-wristed wimps with no cojones!

EOR..........I have to cut the grass.

Elvis has left the building..............

JG

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

I accept no "responsibility". I don't vote and thus the government is
making law and promoting injustice without my support.

Actually John, they have your complete support. By not voting you are allowing whoever gets voted in to do whatever they wish.

What you're doing is the equivalent of letting a blind person walk in front of a fast moving bus without saying anything. Its easy for a morally shallow person to say they have no responsibility, but in fact, you do.

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050514/ap_on_bi_ge/airline_calendar_girls

 

[Spanky]

Nice calendar...