Court approves termination, but it has to be done through collective bargaining - ALPA prevents term

[Pacemaker]

Management has x number of pension dollars to spend, what is wrong with allocating it equitably? This is the essence of the "infamous page 35".

BTW, what's with the "advantaged/disadvantaged" remark?

Do you think pilots just went out to their mailbox one day after high school graduation and found a diploma from a four-year university, and a letter from the FAA containing an ATP with appropriate type-ratings along with a certified logbook with a credit for 5,000 hours? During the 10-or-so years it took the average pilot to amass the credentials and experience required for employment, what were the "disadvantaged" doing to put themsleves onto the "advantaged" track?

 

[chipmunn]

Today's ruling pleased ALPA and its legal staff.

The court ruled in favor of the company's motion that it met the financial conditions under ERISA to seek termination of the pilots pension plan with the PBGC.

However, the judge declined to rule whether the termination of the pilots pension plan can be done within the CBA, thus this ruling was in favor of ALPA’s objection. The ALPA grievance filed on February 5 must be resolved prior to a pension "distress termination" and will be heard on March 13.

The Associated Press said, "U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Stephen Mitchell's ruling means that the airline has not yet completely cleared that hurdle and will be under immense pressure to resolve the pension issue quickly."

Chip

 

[us10]

Judge gives mixed ruling in U.S. Airways pension case

By MATTHEW BARAKAT
AP Business Writer


A bankruptcy judge agreed Saturday to allow U.S. Airways to terminate its pilots' pension plan, but said his ruling will be subject to the pending decision of an arbitrator.

The pension issue is the last hurdle U.S. Airways faces in its plan to emerge from bankruptcy by March 31. U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Stephen Mitchell's ruling means that the airline has not yet completely cleared that hurdle and will be under immense pressure to resolve the pension issue quickly.

U.S. Airways spokesman Chris Chiames said this is the next step.

"We think this is an important ruling because it allows us to stay on track. We're calling on ALPA to join us in immediate negotiations," he said.

Roy Freundlich, a spokesman for the Airline Pilots Association, said the union is pleased that an arbitrator will decide if terminating the plan violates the pilots' collective bargaining agreement.

The key issue is whether the pilots' union agreed to allow the airline to terminate the pension plan in a secret agreement reached back in December.

In the agreement, management promised to begin a new, smaller pension plan if the old one were terminated. They kept the agreement secret because if it became public, they thought it would torpedo efforts to get Congressional legislation to fix their problem.

But union and management differed on the agreement's meaning. U.S. Airways said the letter constituted acquiescence from the pilots to termination of their plan.

But the union said the agreement was only designed to give them protection in the event that the federal Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. instituted efforts to terminate the plan.

Judge Mitchell said Saturday that it was a close call but sided with the union on its interpretation.

On all other matters, Mitchell sided with the airline. He agreed that the airline faces imminent threat of liquidation if it does not resolve the pension issue and he agreed that the airline does not have the money to fully fund its pension plan.

U.S. Airways said the March 31 deadline is critical because it cannot receive $1.24 billion in financing until it emerges from bankruptcy and that it could run out of cash without financing.

U.S. Airways has its largest hub in Charlotte, N.C., where it employs more than 7,000.

Mitchell heard four days of testimony and did not rule until 8 p.m. Saturday. This came after several pilots testified about how much money they would lose if U.S. Airways is allowed to proceed with its plan.

Charles Couch, of Landenberg, Pa., said his annual pension would drop from $65,000 to $30,000 a year.

"It puts me in a dilemma where I can't afford to retire. ... I would have to find another job" after retiring from the airline, he said.

The union said most pilots would receive annual benefits of $50,000 to $70,000 a year under the old plan. Under the new plan, those benefits could be cut in half.

About 18 pilots stood to receive lump-sum benefits of $1-2 million just days from now. Those benefits are now on hold.

An arbitrator is scheduled to hear the issue March 13. The final hearing for U.S. Airways to emerge from bankruptcy is scheduled for March 18.

U.S. Airways said the pilots' pension is underfunded by about $800 million over the next seven years.

 

[delldude]

all i got is can of iron city and a hot dog..

 

[LavMan]

Stop complaining, the judge ruled, now go sit down and negotiate a settlement.

 

[us10]

Lavman,

There will be no settlement!All parties have very limited room to move to the others' position.

As the judge's ruling indicates the company can't afford the DBP.If the company tries to sweeten the DCP the PBGC will probably object citing abuse of the insurance system.

ALPA is under extreme pressure from the membership to fight this to the end, even if it means the end of the company.

We will all wait for the arbitration. I just can't see a good end to this problem.

 

[PITbull]

Then it would appear that the judge ruled in favor of the ALPA UNION to resolve this dispute through arbitration and the bargaining process.The law rcognizes the importance of the collective bargaining agreement in these types of major disputes even IN BK.

Is this a first for BK proceedings? I have been hearing all along from senior mangement that the Judge always rules on behalf of the debtor. Well it appears that ALPA's argument was compelling enough to sway THE judge.

 

[delldude]

my sixteen years here and its like that movie"the never ending story"

 

[tug_slug]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 3/1/2003 9:07:23 PM chipmunn wrote:

Today's ruling pleased ALPA and its legal staff.

The court ruled in favor of the company's motion that it met the financial conditions under ERISA to seek termination of the pilots pension plan with the PBGC.

However, the judge declined to rule whether the termination of the pilots pension plan can be done within the CBA, thus this ruling was in favor of ALPA’s objection. The ALPA grievance filed on February 5 must be resolved prior to a pension "distress termination" and will be heard on March 13.

The Associated Press said, "U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Stephen Mitchell's ruling means that the airline has not yet completely cleared that hurdle and will be under immense pressure to resolve the pension issue quickly."

Chip
----------------
[/blockquote]

Bronner knowing an arbitrator isn't going to have a decision by the March 31 deadline is going to get tired of this cat and mouse game and will more than likely take his money and run.

Gotta hand it to them pilots ... they showed Siegal and Bronner who's running this airline. Even if its into chapter 7 liquidation.

Tug

 

[PITbull]

Pacemaker,

Explain the page 35 motion, and WHAT would YOU consider equitable, since pilots who either went in the military to get their ratings OR went to school and dedicated the time?

I guess the rest of us disadvantaged at this airline DID NOTHING to attempt to advantage themselves? Do you think that maybe, just maybe, many folks who are mechanics, Agents, f/as, and dispatchers, and those who clean planes NEVER WENT THROUGH A HIGHER EDUCATION AND SPENT JUST AS MANY DOLLARS TO GET EDUCATED AS A PILOT? Do you think that f/as aren't lawyers too? or that some went for a masters in nursing?????

Don't go there with me and imply that only pilots spent money to be educated to do their field.

 

[PITbull]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 3/1/2003 9:37:01 PM fatherabraham wrote:

[blockquote]
----------------
On 3/1/2003 8:53:30 PM Pacemaker wrote:

Management has x number of pension dollars to spend, what is wrong with allocating it equitably? This is the essence of the "infamous page 35".

BTW, what's with the "advantaged/disadvantaged" remark?

Do you think pilots just went out to their mailbox one day after high school graduation and found a diploma from a four-year university, and a letter from the FAA containing an ATP with appropriate type-ratings along with a certified logbook with a credit for 5,000 hours? During the 10-or-so years it took the average pilot to amass the credentials and experience required for employment, what were the "disadvantaged" doing to put themsleves onto the "advantaged" track?


----------------
[/blockquote]

Pacemaker,

Your wasting your time with sound logic on this board. I know...I fought the good fight and lost. 90% + posters are of the mindset that anyone who EARNS more than them are overpaid. Of course they would'nt embrace socialism if it meant say the airport janitor / food service / shoe shiner / aircraft fueler etc. were paid their salary w/o paying the dues to EARN it.
----------------
[/blockquote]

Father,

I hope you are not implying that I believe the pilots are OVERPAID. I am saying that they are considered the "advantaged", in that they still can maintain a livable wage, while others who had a livable wage before the concessions, now do not; making them LESS advantaged, (if you check out the above post where this originated).
[img src='http://www.usaviation.com/idealbb/images/smilies/5.gif']

 

[TVLOOPS]

Copied From another File

So What !!!

I worked for PSA/US Air/US Airways for just over 32 years on the Ticket counter.

Retirement as everyone knows was frozen in 1991. I retired about two years ago and now receive less than $900/Mo.

On or about June or July the company, if it still exist, will be charging me a little more then $200/Mo. for medical insurance.

I don't care about the skygod's problem. They have had plenty of time to plan for their future as myself.

If the pilots don't care about the company, then they should QUIT!

My next post I will try to be more polite.

Like chipmunn says, you should say your name. Any one who has worked for an airline for more than a couple of years will/should know the address/name

 

[geo1004]

Translation:


I'm a CP and just booked DL for flights to TPA in May. US was the same price. Why should I stay?

Why?

As a passenger who stares at the options, why stay with US???

 

[savyinvestor]

Munn, Does this mean your staying? I was kind of hoping I would fly with you on my next trip on BA. Savy

 

[us10]

MEC CODE-A-PHONE UPDATE #2
March 1, 2003

This is Roy Freundlich with a US Airways MEC update number two for Saturday, March 1.

The bankruptcy court hearing on the Company’s motion to distress terminate the pilots defined benefit plan reconvened today, and Judge Mitchell issued the following decisions:

The judge ruled in favor of the company’s motion that it has met the financial conditions under the Employment Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) and approved the distress termination of the pilots’ defined benefit plan subject to the pilots’ collective bargaining agreement. The bankruptcy court’s decision does not automatically terminate the plan. The court’s ruling must now be processed by the PBGC.

In issuing his ruling the judge stated that the Company did not have the money itself to emerge from bankruptcy. US Airways requires from other parties DIP financing to operate in bankruptcy and exit financing to emerge from bankruptcy and had to satisfy lender conditions to receive financing. He also stated that US airways could not pay its debt without pension plan termination.

The judge ruled in favor of ALPA’s objection to the Company’s proposed order that the court should determine if plan termination was in violation of our pilots’ collective bargaining agreement, which the Company claims it is not. The judge determined that the bankruptcy court is not the proper forum to decide this labor contract issue and declined to make a finding. This decision preserves our collective bargaining rights under the Railway Labor Act and allows the contract violation issue to be settled under the grievance process. Recall that ALPA filed a grievance on February 5, 2003, against the Company’s actions on this issue.

The PBGC cannot complete a pension plan distress termination until the contractual dispute is resolved.

The judge also authorized the debtor, US Airways, to negotiate a defined contribution plan as committed to in the December 13, 2002, letter concerning the follow on pension funding commitment to pilots.

Needless to say, your MEC representatives are very disappointed in the judge’s ruling on the distress termination issue, but was gratified that the judge ruled in favor of ALPA’s position that the contract violation issue be resolved under the grievance provisions of the Railway Labor Act.

The MEC and ALPA’s legal counsel are reviewing ALPA’s legal options and other contingency requirements.

Please remember we have 1827 pilots on furlough.

Thank you for listening.