Skip to main content

View Diary: Inside the Hostess Bankery (260 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I recall a discussion (10+ / 0-)

    about this when I worked for my old railroad employer.  Back in the 80's, they were being questioned about their management of the employee pension fund, specifically their attempts to find a way to cut their contribution to it.  There was also a problem with how they were investing the funds.

    Back then (late 80's), they were prevented from doing this, but apparently the law has changed or the lawyers found a lot of loopholes.

    Those laws were strict, they were there for a reason - to prevent companies from stealing from employee pension funds and dumping the financial burden onto SS or Railroad Retirement systems.  

    Please stand by. I'm looking for a new sig line.

    by Betty Pinson on Sun Nov 18, 2012 at 07:13:06 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  The Hostess pension was rated "green," (7+ / 0-)

      meaning 80% or more funded (link).  I think - and this is a wacky, complicated area of law that I sure as hell don't understand - that when it's below the "green zone," the employer has to take corrective action to get it back into the green zone.  That suggests it can defer contributions while the fund is in the green zone.

      •  So this is an area of law that I hope Dems (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        TheOpinionGuy, lonespark

        in the Senate, in the House, and the President address during the coming two years-- clarification of pension funding and contributions in such a way that companies aren't allowed to walk away from their obligations, even in bankruptcy.

        That's one more thing to add to my long list of small problems. --my son, age 10

        by concernedamerican on Sun Nov 18, 2012 at 01:43:40 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site