Bush Backs Off Opposition To Pension Relief

[airlineorphan]

Bush Admin Eases Opposition To Airline Pension Break

Apparently the Bush Administration has backed off their earlier threat to veto anything that specifically gave pension relief to the steel or airline industries. Pilots and others wanna comment upon the implications of this for your pension situation?

In solidarity,
-Airlineorphan

 

[sentrido]

I think the text for the link should have been "Bush Admin realizes its an election year".

 

[delldude]

I think the text for the link should have been "Bush Admin realizes its an election year".

SO TELL ME SOME KERRY DIATRIBE.

 

[sentrido]

Kerry thinks the text for the link should have been "Bush Admin realizes its an election year".

 

[airlineorphan]

sentrido wrote:

I think the text for the link should have been "Bush Admin realizes its an election year".

Good one sentrido. Posturing is, of course, what the the Demopublicans and the Republicrats do.

That's part of why I wanted to hear from pilots about the implications for their pension. If I recall correctly, US Airways was supposed to restore the DB plan for pilots if they got pension relief from the federales.

???
-Airlineorphan

 

[700UW]

I guess W is all ready back tracking!

UPDATE - White House warns against extra pension relief
Friday March 5, 7:00 pm ET
By Susan Cornwell


(Adds impact on united airlines, details of pension costs)
WASHINGTON, March 5 (Reuters) - The White House warned lawmakers on Friday against special help for severely ailing pension plans ahead of a meeting of congressional negotiators next week to write a final version of a pension relief bill.

Senior advisers to President George W. Bush sent a letter to Capitol Hill saying they supported the heart of legislation providing up to $80 billion in temporary relief over two years to companies with traditional "defined benefit" pension plans.

But the Bush administration opposed amendments added in the Senate that would grant up to $16.4 billion in additional help for airlines, steelmakers and other companies with badly underfunded pension plans that may also seek the extra relief.

Bankrupt United Airlines, a unit of UAL Corp. (OTC BB:UALAQ.OB - News), is one company hoping for the added pension relief to help lower costs and improve the chances of receiving a $1.6 billion federal loan guarantee that is crucial for its restructuring.

House and Senate negotiators plan to hold their first meeting on Tuesday to try to work out differences in the legislation.

"Our preference is for the president to receive (the bill) as it passed the House. The president's senior (advisers) will recommend that he veto (the bill) if these objectionable provisions in the Senate amendment are not removed," the White House letter said.

It was signed by Josh Bolten, director of the Office of Management and Budget; Stephen Friedman, the head of Bush's National Economic Council; Treasury Secretary John Snow; Labor Secretary Elaine Chao; and Commerce Secretary Don Evans.

Chao, Snow and Evans sent a similar warning to the Senate in January, but that did not stop the chamber from approving its version of the legislation by a veto-proof margin.

Sen. Edward Kennedy appeared unimpressed with the White House objection. "President Bush would be making a serious error in vetoing any pension relief legislation," the Massachusetts Democrat said in a statement.

The administration warned the Senate bill would allow any company with a badly underfunded plan -- not just airlines or steelmakers -- to seek a waiver from special catch-up contributions that would otherwise be required.

These other companies would take the bulk of the $16.4 billion in extra relief, according to calculations by federal pension insurers. Major airlines would get $1.3 billion in extra relief and steel companies, $300 million.

"To excuse sponsors of underfunded plans from a good portion of their remaining near-term funding obligations would irresponsibly weaken our pension system, jeopardizing the benefits that America's workers have earned," the White House letter said.

 

[airlineorphan]

flippitydoodah! flippityday!

 

[700UW]

Another fine moment for the commander and chief, I cant see a thing!

 

[usfliboi]

Well to point out your own beliefs. This is from the media so we dont know if this is fact. So the word "guess" you used is a good word to use.

 

[Light Years]

Maybe he'll suggest altering the the constitiution, our most sacred document, to make airline employees second class citizens. <_<

 

[Colby]

Another fine moment for the commander and chief, I cant see a thing!

OMG..... That was Funny.........


Thanks........ I needed that !!!!!

 

[airlineorphan]

usfliboi comments:

Well to point out your own beliefs. This is from the media so we dont know if this is fact. So the word "guess" you used is a good word to use.

Well, usfliboi, you are absolutely right to suggest that what is printed in the paper should be up for scrutiny. "Don't believe everything you read" as they say.

Unfortunately for the strength of your argument, the analogy you employ for your argument doesn't hold up.

There are somewhat different standards of rigor for newspaper reporting than there are for corporate propaganda phone lines. There are editors and checks and balances (inadequate, but more intensive now in the wake of some of the reporter scandals of the last couple years). The newspaper at least has to maintain a certain pretense of objectivity.

There there is absolutely no such requirement of checks and balances (though there is certainly plenty of pretense) on corporate propaganda lines. They do, however run things past Legal, I would assume, but that is for the purposes of CYA, which is not the same thing as accuracy and fact-checking.

When the figures Siegel and so forth are touting are included in an SEC filing, then there is a bit more weight to them because there is the potential for them to be held accountable for fraud if they have doctored the books.

In the meantime, whether the stats are correct or not, it still leaves the question of how they were arrived, how they compare to similarly arrived at figures at other companies and what they actually mean. Siegel is a master spinmeister as most of us learned in the aftermath of his employee-friendly road shows in 2002.

... And now back to our regularly scheduled thread topic.....

-Airlineorphan

 

[delldude]

Another fine moment for the commander and chief, I cant see a thing!

those must be the binoc's clinton left him.....no wonder they had bad intel in iraq.

 

[sentrido]

I am not a pilot and I dont have a pension so this doesnt affect me directly.But it does affect me at an emotional level. I hate seeing ordinary people getting srewed.If the government (and by government I mean us taxpayers) can bail these people out,
Why not help a few Pensions?

 

[Boeingguy]

>>>I hate seeing ordinary people getting srewed.If the government (and by government I mean us taxpayers) can bail these people out,...<<<<

I don't care to bail anyone out. I am a pilot for an airline with 401K and profit sharing which has done well and is not associated with the government in anyway. I often had pilots at USAirways and UAL asking me when is my airline getting a "real" retirement program and how dumb my group of pilots were for not going the traditional "A" plans et al. Now they are crying for a possible government hand-out (if their's fails). So that means MY tax dollars might go to THEIR retirement....while they made jokes about my retirement plan set-up.

Nope, no special considerations for them. They bragged about what a great retirment plan they had and how 'terrible' mine was.....so they can now deal with their "fabulous" retirment plans.