Help Our UAL Friends

("sfb" wrote)
I suggest you lock up the Congress critters as UAL and the other legacy
carriers are only doing what the law permits. If they were ignoring the
law, the SEC would have done a number on them long ago for incorrect
financial reporting by a public company.


25% of this country's economic problems can be directly traced back to the
SEC and their inability to come up with clear accounting rules - and then
enforce them in any meaningful way. [Cite? Me]

Agreed on point A: Pensions should be off limits to Lee Iacocca CEO types.
Over funded
my ass -- for today maybe. How about in 12 years? Oops, a turn around in the
numbers? "Congress" (meaning you$$ you$$ you$$ and you$$) ..."help!!"


Montblack

"Montblack" wrote in message
...
("sfb" wrote)
I suggest you lock up the Congress critters as UAL and the other legacy
carriers are only doing what the law permits. If they were ignoring the
law, the SEC would have done a number on them long ago for incorrect
financial reporting by a public company.


25% of this country's economic problems can be directly traced back to the
SEC and their inability to come up with clear accounting rules - and then
enforce them in any meaningful way. [Cite? Me]

Agreed on point A: Pensions should be off limits to Lee Iacocca CEO types.
Over funded
my ass -- for today maybe. How about in 12 years? Oops, a turn around in
the
numbers? "Congress" (meaning you$$ you$$ you$$ and you$$) ..."help!!"


Montblack


The company has an obligation to provide benefits and has to fund the plan
to provide for those benefits. Overfunding belongs to the Company.

Mike
MU-2

("Mike Rapoport" wrote)
The company has an obligation to provide benefits and has to fund the plan
to provide for those benefits. Overfunding belongs to the Company.


Agreed - however on the back end, not the front end based on outmoded
projections.


Montblack

Montblack wrote:

The company has an obligation to provide benefits and has to fund
the plan to provide for those benefits.

Agreed - however on the back end, not the front end based on outmoded
projections.

Why does the company have an *obligation* to provide benefits?

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_s...veloperid=4415
Reduce spam. Use Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com
____________________

In article ,
"John T" wrote:

Montblack wrote:

The company has an obligation to provide benefits and has to fund
the plan to provide for those benefits.

Agreed - however on the back end, not the front end based on outmoded
projections.

Why does the company have an *obligation* to provide benefits?


If they offer benefits as one of the benefits of your working for them,
rather than for a competitor, then renege on the deal after so many
years, you would have a pretty good reason to be upset.

"Orval Fairbairn" wrote in message
news
In article ,
"John T" wrote:

Why does the company have an *obligation* to provide benefits?


If they offer benefits as one of the benefits of your working for them,
rather than for a competitor, then renege on the deal after so many
years, you would have a pretty good reason to be upset.

And a very good reason to go work for their competitor.

(Not to mention start your own business and give yourself infinite benefits)

--
Matt

---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

Matt Barrow wrote:

If they offer benefits as one of the benefits of your working for them,
rather than for a competitor, then renege on the deal after so many
years, you would have a pretty good reason to be upset.

And a very good reason to go work for their competitor.

By that time, it's too late for that to do any good.

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

"John T" wrote in message
...
Montblack wrote:

The company has an obligation to provide benefits and has to fund
the plan to provide for those benefits.

Agreed - however on the back end, not the front end based on outmoded
projections.

Why does the company have an *obligation* to provide benefits?


Because the was the agreement when the employee was hired. If I hired you
and said I would pay you $10.00/hr and then handed you your first week
paycheck and only paid you $9.00/hr how would you feel about that?

"Gig 601XL Builder" wr.giacona@coxDOTnet wrote in message
news:X2AYe.70301$7f5.54144@okepread01...

"John T" wrote in message
...
Montblack wrote:

The company has an obligation to provide benefits and has to fund
the plan to provide for those benefits.

Agreed - however on the back end, not the front end based on outmoded
projections.

Why does the company have an *obligation* to provide benefits?


Because the was the agreement when the employee was hired. If I hired you
and said I would pay you $10.00/hr and then handed you your first week
paycheck and only paid you $9.00/hr how would you feel about that?

I'd feel like telling them to live up to their agreements or I'd take a
walk.

Since only real estate transactions need be in writing, and even dinky jobs
often have written stipulations (not a formal contract, but a written
statement), in many states that would be a violation of state law. In any
case, why would someone be willing to work for such folks?


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

"Gig 601XL Builder" wr.giacona@coxDOTnet wrote in message
news:X2AYe.70301$7f5.54144@okepread01...

"John T" wrote in message
...
Montblack wrote:

The company has an obligation to provide benefits and has to fund
the plan to provide for those benefits.

Agreed - however on the back end, not the front end based on outmoded
projections.

Why does the company have an *obligation* to provide benefits?


Because the was the agreement when the employee was hired. If I hired you
and said I would pay you $10.00/hr and then handed you your first week
paycheck and only paid you $9.00/hr how would you feel about that?

I'd feel like telling them to live up to their agreements or I'd take a
walk.

Since only real estate transactions need be in writing, and even dinky
jobs
often have written stipulations (not a formal contract, but a written
statement), in many states that would be a violation of state law. In any
case, why would someone be willing to work for such folks?


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO



And taking a walk is all good and fine if you find out they screwed you over
after a week. But after 20 years just going to work for the competition
isn't going to help you much.