It's difficult isn't it? On the one hand, I feel that if the company has 'promised' somebody something then they should stick to their bargain; on the other, if it's right that funding the scheme is effectively half a year's profit then that doesn't sound very sustainable. What I don't know from Maria's email is whether BA can save money by plugging the deficit by making tax deductions (ie are they saving a lot in corporation (for example) tax by doing this)?
However BA (and others) got themselves into this position, it wouldn't take much to make this scheme unworkable by the sound of it.
By closing the scheme down at least people in 15 years' time might get something. However unfair it is.
Am I missing something?