AA and the PBGC

[FWAAA]

I think BoeingBoy has flown west. RIP.

Unless he died in the last 24 hours, you're mistaken.

 

[usa1]

Once a plan is terminated and turned over to the PBGC, I don't think any successor company can be held responsible for it and the benefits that would be paid out are in line w/ the PBGC's schedule, not the schedule or plan of any of the companies that might hire those employees, past, present, or future.
Someone can correct me if I am wrong.

Right, AA is in no way tied to a US Air/PBGC agreement made years ago ..... it's an agreement made by the PBGC with the employee group when they took over their plan.

Our agreement says we can start ours at age 55, if we no longer work for "US Airways or a subsidiary of US Airways. This would Including US Airways going away via a merger or CoC.

 

[johnny kat]

FWAAA:

johnny kat, on 05 January 2013 - 08:43 AM, said:

I think BoeingBoy has flown west. RIP.

Unless he died in the last 24 hours, you're mistaken.

____________________________________________________________________

I could be mistaken. If so I apologize. I read something on the pilots board in regards to BoeingBoy and I assumed he had past. Once again I apologize if this isn't true. And I am very glad to hear he is alive and kicking!

 

[usa1]

He posted on the FlyerTalk Forum yesterday...... I was just reading his commits on how he thinks this merger will go down.

"New AMR" stock will be exchanged for current US stock. So far Parker has only made one offer - AA creditors will get 70% of the new stock while US stockholders and execs will split the other 30%. I haven't seen how many shares of new stock would be issued but that would determine how many new shares each US share was exchanged for.

A value would be assigned to the new stock prior to it's issuance - necessary to determine how many shares each creditor would get for their claim- but value would be determined by the stock market when the new stock started to trade, although it wouldn't be unusual for the new stock to trade higher at least initially because of the "everything's gonna be great" PR put out in conjunction with the merger. As I recall, the new US stock rose from a valuation less than $20/share used for distributing the shares to in the $30's after the US/HP merger, but eventually came down to earth since US hasn't produced a cumulative net profit since the merger (due to the 2008 jump in fuel prices and 2009 recession).

Jim

 

[FWAAA]

When America West brought USAir out of BK, and choose to use the name US Airways, we were told NO because there was no name change. So how could the same thing happen between AA and US .... and the name be American and the answer be the same? How could TWA employees be told yes, and us no this time? This will be interesting for many US employees?

AA and TWA did not merge. AA bought certain assets from TWA and hired most of the employees, so the ex-TWA employees no longer worked for TWA (as TWA ceased to be an airline). My guess is that if/when US and AA merge, it will be a merger and not an asset purchase, and thus the result may very well be different.

 

[usa1]

Our PBGC agreement clearly states we can start it at age 55, if no longer employed by "US Airways or a subsidiary of US Airways". New AMR stock means NO MORE US Airways. A call to the PBGC case worker indicated the same .... they said once the event occurs, information will be released.

Finger crossed .... we need it. Our retirement stinks?

 

[Barfbag]

AA and TWA did not merge. AA bought certain assets from TWA and hired most of the employees, so the ex-TWA employees no longer worked for TWA (as TWA ceased to be an airline). My guess is that if/when US and AA merge, it will be a merger and not an asset purchase, and thus the result may very well be different.

Well since you've posted a non-PGBC quote and are now reinjecting TWA, let me say that TWAers paid their senority dues and sadly had their pensions reduced too.

I hope its not time for AAers to bend over and spread the cheeks.

 

[Bob Owens]

AA and TWA did not merge. AA bought certain assets from TWA and hired most of the employees, so the ex-TWA employees no longer worked for TWA (as TWA ceased to be an airline). My guess is that if/when US and AA merge, it will be a merger and not an asset purchase, and thus the result may very well be different.

If they just bought some of the assetts then howcome they also got a load of liabilities as well? AMR made good on debts owed to the IAM, thats how they got them to back off and allow the TWU to stay in place without a vote-as far as the NMB was concerned it was a merger. TWA also got Seniority and sick time. In 2002 they claimed almost $1billion in Goodwill loses associated with the loss of value from TWA. So no it wasnt simply a purchase of some assetts and AA generously hiring TWA workers as you claim, it was a merger.

 

[WorldTraveler]

From a corporate standpoint, AA-TW was an asset purchase just as DL-Pan Am was.

Our PBGC agreement clearly states we can start it at age 55, if no longer employed by "US Airways or a subsidiary of US Airways". New AMR stock means NO MORE US Airways. A call to the PBGC case worker indicated the same .... they said once the event occurs, information will be released.

Finger crossed .... we need it. Our retirement stinks?

interesting clause....


glad to hear Jim is doing well and posting elsewhere

 

[Bob Owens]

When America West brought USAir out of BK, and choose to use the name US Airways, we were told NO because there was no name change. So how could the same thing happen between AA and US .... and the name be American and the answer be the same? How could TWA employees be told yes, and us no this time? This will be interesting for many US employees?

Because they say so.

 

[FWAAA]

Our PBGC agreement clearly states we can start it at [font="tahoma][color="#000000"]age 55, if no longer employed by "US Airways or a subsidiary of US Airways". New AMR stock means NO MORE US Airways. A call to the PBGC case worker indicated the same .... they said once the event occurs, information will be released. [/color][/font]

I haven't read what you're reading, but it would not surprise me if the words "successors and assigns" are in there, and if they are, that might throw a wrench in your plans.

 

[usa1]

Here is what it says word for word.

Note:

If you are currently employed by US Airways or its subsidiaries or currently receiving Long Term Disability benefits, you may not receive early pension benefits (age 55) from the plan. However, if you have reached the normal Retirement age (age 65) under your plan, you may receive your pension benefits from the PBGC and continue to work for US Airways or its subsidiaries. Please contact us at the telephone number below if you have questions regarding your eligibility.

I called them and they knew what I was talking about right away and said until the merger and terms are official and public they could not answer my question.

That is how former TWA employees tapped into their PBGC at age 55 ... TWA was no longer around. It had nothing to do with American Airlines.

 

[Veritas]

AA and TWA did not merge. AA bought certain assets from TWA and hired most of the employees, so the ex-TWA employees no longer worked for TWA (as TWA ceased to be an airline). My guess is that if/when US and AA merge, it will be a merger and not an asset purchase, and thus the result may very well be different.

I invite you to reread the CAB definition of merger in the Allegheny-Mohawk decision (59 C.A.B. 45) which has been reaffirmed by the McCaskill-Bond amendment.

Section 2. (a) The term "merger" as used herein means to join action by the two carriers whereby the unify, consolidate, merge, or pool in whole or in part their separate airline facilities or any of the operations or services previously performed by them through such separate facilities.

 

[FWAAA]

I invite you to reread the CAB definition of merger in the Allegheny-Mohawk decision (59 C.A.B. 45) which has been reaffirmed by the McCaskill-Bond amendment.

That's irrelevant to the discussion. usa1 wondered why the TWA employees were able to draw their PBGC-guaranteed pensions when they reached 55 while the US employees were not, and the answer is that TWA ceased to exist because it did not merge with AA - selected assets were purchased and employees offered employment. Allegheny-Mowhawk and MaCaskill-Bond apparently didn't factor into the PBGC's determination.

 

[usa1]

the answer is that TWA ceased to exist because it did not merge with AA - selected assets were purchased and employees offered employment. Allegheny-Mowhawk and MaCaskill-Bond apparently didn't factor into the PBGC's determination.

TWA ceased to exist was all that mattered in the PBGC agreement. Doesn't matter how they went away.

In the AWA/US merger the reason the PBGC gave was, US Airways was the surviving entity. Therefore we still worked for US Airways. At that time we were told that the US Airways name had to go away. It looks like not only the US Airways name will go way this time ... the company will no longer exist. Rumors say "new stock" will be issued to LCC stock holders in a post bankruptcy "new American Airlines".

We worked hard for our frozen pensions ..... it amazes me how easy people can get unearned entitlements like food stamps, subsidized housing and free cell phones from the government, and then they would even think about making it hard for a hard working person to receive an earned entitlement. Like his retirement. An agreement is an agreement? PBGC needs to honor it.