Nick Figaretto

In Scandinavia the pension is payed by the company.

Kingsnake

All fired yesterday

wileydog3

I still think you are missing the point. Yes, the payment comes from the company however it is part of a deferred compensation.

I hire you to fly my plane. I will pay you $500 today OR I will pay you $350 in cash, $50 in insurance and $100 toward your pension. It is all YOUR money but you decide how you want it. Why this way? Because you don't need all that money right now, you don't want to pay taxes on it and I get to deduct it from my taxes.

Pensions are NOT paid for by the employer. It is money that you set aside for the company to pay you LATER.

There is no such thing as a free lunch and that includes a pension!

Hanguren

Wiley; The point is that the collective agreement you refer to states that these money will be paid to you pension account until the age of 60, whereafter you shall retire! These pilots though use the new EU laws to try to stay in their jobs even though the CLA states otherwise.

I dont see your point at all!

If you feel its ok that these pilots use the law against the CLA, it is fine with me, but dont use the way SAS pay out salary and pension as a reason. That is completely irrelevant!

And as mentioned above; As of yesterday the problem is a bit smaller...

wileydog3

Yes, I realize that. You are arguing they must quit. I was pointing out the error about how pensions are earned and paid. Two different points.

But the argument some made was the company provides the pension as though they woke up one morning and said, "you know.. Hanguren is old and no longer works but we are going to continue giving him some money." That is NOT how pensions work and the correct term to understand them is deferred compensation.

The other specious argument was that because some young turks wanted a job that the old turks must quit. That smacks of entitlement and more and more we see that philosophy (somebody OWES us!) in the US. It is a sad commentary.

IF the law says that at age 60 you must retire, fine. That too is something that was negotiated. Fortunately here in the states, we have had the age 60 law removed... not that I wanted to continue flying for an airline.

Nick Figaretto

As I see it, all the employees working under the same CLA are collectively paying each other's pension. Simply because we, as a group, have forced the company to so so through collective negotiations.

A single pilot would never had the ability to negotiate a pension anywhere near the pension we now have in SAS. Or in any larger airline, for that matter.

Hence, if one pilot breaks the collective agreement by continuing to work after the agreed upon retirement age, which means that he both gets his salary and their pension at the same time, then he is in fact stealing money from the collective.

It's a selfish act that destroys the pilot group's ability to sustain a decent pension system.

Guttn

Boarding.no reporting that 50 are to get the letter in the end of September, and another 40 in 2009.

wileydog3

Nick said, Fine. I give up. A pension is paid by someone other than the one collecting it and it is essentially a free ride for old farts who have worked for 30-35yrs.

FJS

It's a funny business we're in. For the longest time the unions in SAS fought and struggled to get a good pension and a low retirement age (58).

And now, after it's been in effect they (the pilots) start fighting to not have to retire early.

It's gonna be interesting to see how many lawsuits that will be filed against SAS from disgruntled old pilots being fired out of seniority, and who are hell-bent on flying past 60?

stanleycup

.

CS
Here we got our selves another "kernel".
Well, welcome aboard. Your hopes are unfortunately not in your favor....I do work as a pilot for living.
Maybe you can write your company and just let them know that only people with military experience and military personalities can fly our airplanes, that might make you sleep better at night.
I'm on deck..............

KapteinKrok

Wileydog3: This is incredible! Throughout the thread you act like everyone else are complete idiots, and you even dare to finish with a when Nick F in an easy to understand way explains how things work...

It is the collective that pays for the pension exactly the way you argued: We have put quite a lot of our pay increase in pension instead of other issues like pay, days off, vacation etc, and then the 60+ people are trying to use the law to attack the CLA that gave them a good pension deal! That is disgusting!

If you do not understand this, it is YOU that have a really big problem!!!

KK

Viking101

Pensions, agreements etc. This is partly why SAS is going so bad. All the 43 (or whatever) unions are killing the company because they all want constantly more...
And of course, the older you get the more grumpy you become. Having an average of 49 in FD does not make it better. All the old guys are talking and fighting about is there pension, instead of trying to keep the company together.

Its so stupid!

Retire, get a life and let the younger and less moaning people take control!

wileydog3

Not really. As someone who saw the union reps agree to give up my pension (read deferred compensation) I am very familiar with pensions, pension fundings and pension terminations. I am familiar with how pensions are funded and what happens after they are either terminated or frozen in the US at least. Maybe and more likely from the heat I am taking, the pension system in Norway is markedly different.

If my posts offended, my apology. And again, maybe everyone in Norway understands pensions. That is not the case in the US. Many seem to think it is some a kind gesture by the company when in fact, the pensioner has paid for and invested in the deferred compensation. You accrue x benefits based on your time with the company and YOUR earnings, not someone else's. And although the pension was negotiated by collective bargaining, the union puts nothing in the pot toward the pension.

In the US, companies took the deferred compensation and invested it or bought annuities which then made payments to pensioners. It is not now and never was some gift for being a good, long term employee.

As for laws and as for what is negotiated, you will find (If Norway is anything like the US) that a mere stroke of the pen will give and take away. In the US, after 9-11 many companies used the 'force majeure' clause to essentially gut the contracts. And when the employees challenged the company for enacting the clause, the courts said, "Nope.. they can do that." And the company walked away from contract after contract.

KapteinKrok

Then there is a big differense wileydog3: In Norway, in genereal, all pensions are paid in to the insurance company, and what you have on your account, and can not be a part of any settlement among creditors in a bankrypcy etc. It is your money.

That is though only the main rule. In SAS, some of the pension (appr. 20%), exceeds the governmental maximum allowed pension, and this part is to be paid in cash by SAS, and not through the insurance company. If SAS goes bankrupt, or it is agreed upon by the unions, this part of the pension may be lost.

I have been in quite a lot of meetings with representatives from USALPA, also about pensions, and have heard about the pension robbery that many US airlines were allowed to do after 9-11. I am really sorry to hear that you are one of these pilots!

And; You did not offend me, but when I read some of your posts, it seemed like you thought that some of us were idiots when we did not agree with you. Reading your last post, I understand that this is not the case...

Best of luck!

Krok

TowerDog

That would be like the "B Fund" slice of the pension in the US.
Not even God can take that one away...

What the company can avoid paying out under the chapter 11 protection from creditors would be the "A" fund.
(Just ask the United and Delta guys )

That being said, the US Government will kick in with some kind of sharply reduced "pension guarantee" of about 30 cents on the dollar or some such amount if indeed the "A" fund is lost under chapter 11.

Guttn

And as KapteinKrok says, it would and should be in the interest of the SAS employees that the company doesn`t go bust, as they then could lose their company paid portion of their pension. But that would mean thinking well ahead, and in aviation that`s almost impossible