Rosen's language is the same as the language the company used when they stole the funds in the Supplimental Medical plan. That was where employees paid out of pocket for decades so when they retire they would have$300,000 instead of $50,000 coverage. The company claimed it was a term policy. The company said that "they " weren't getting the $80 million or so because it could not go into the General fund, that those funds from the members pockets had to be used to pay for Medical benefits, which would otherwise come from the company's General fund. So in reality it had the same net affect , even better because its not revenue which could end up being taxed. So to say that AA does not benefit from this is false, because the $80 million from the plan left an extra $80 million in the General Fund for them to do whatever they want with.
What's significant in Rosen's 2011 otherwise deliberately ambiguous letter is where he says '
One further comment,,,.
The fact that the Union agreed to terminate the plan, give us our contributions back, and a year later still no word on the company match makes it that much more likely that we will never see those funds. For some of our coworkers that completely cancels out the Equity.