Originally Posted by theblakefish
Maybe so, but those organizations that have their pension plans setup in this way are still obligated to provide appropriately, regardless of how they're setup. Pensions are a big thing to me, even though I do not, have not, and probably never will work for a company that has one! For as long as pensions have been around, people have relied on them to provide for them during retirement. Whether or not that is a wise move is not the point here, it was advertised to tens of millions of workers as a true benefit of working for a particular company. When I read about Bethleham Steel
in the past, or United
currently defaulting on their plans, it makes me furious. United should ahve shut down routes, sold planes...anything to save their workers hard-earned $$'s.
Getting back to CO, based on their recent financial performance - compared to the other LCC's - I would think that CO is using their money wiser than the others.
There's a certain naivete and short-sightedness that many of the 'don't touch my pension money' crowd seems to exhibit. Many seem to have failed to grasp that many pension funds are currently grossly underfunded, meaning that the company doesn't have the money to pay the benefits when they come due. The cash has to come from somewhere and when a company is unprofitable, there is no cash to go around.
Speaking of the United pension action, people don't seem to understand. United couldn't fund the pension. If United shuttered their doors, the beneficiaries would have only received an amount equal to what United had contributed, an amount far less then they were due. By shifting their pension obligations, beneficiaries were guaranteed an amount far greater than they would receive if United completely goes under. Which would you rather have? Gamble the bulk of your defined pension on United's survival for the full amount, or give up a small portion of it in exchange for a guarantee. Don't they always say to take even money?
Secondly, suggesting the UA should shut down routes and sell planes to save the pensions is asinine. UA's business is flying planes. You might as well just say close up shop and divvy up what's left. Even if you could somehow shut down routes and sell planes to profitability, what does that mean? Fewer routes and planes means more jobs lost. Would you rather keep your job or your pension?