I will vote 'no' merely because we are being presented with one option as being the only option that will 'save' the fund (until management come back in 5-10 years to rob it further).
No one is sitting down and explaining all the other options that are available to help mitigate cost to both the company and the employees. Even if those options are not viable, no one is actually going through them with us to prove that... so what is being hidden from us??
If you were to buy a house and the estate agent said to you they could get you a mortgage, would you accept this mortgage witohut checking out other options?
It's what we are being asked to do with this deal - and sums invovled are similar!! We are being sold something by someone who has it in their best interest to sell us this particular deal!!
It seems that the only people who are having to really dig into their pockets to rescue the fund are the employess - present and future.
Regardless of arguments about cost saving by trimming un-needed staff etc, the profits are already available to pay the anticipated excess for the pension fund over the next few years. I'm not saying the company should necessarily shell out all the money without some employee contribution to help, but it can afford to do more than it is trying to get away with.