Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

GM to cut about one-fourth of U.S. pension liability
Reuters ( via Yahoo) ^ | 6/1/2012 | Deepa Seetharaman and Ben Klayman

Posted on 06/02/2012 3:11:30 PM PDT by taildragger

DETROIT (Reuters) - General Motors Co will cut nearly a quarter of its U.S. pension obligation by transferring the management of its pension plans for 118,000 white-collar retirees to a third party and offering lump-sum buyouts.

The two moves unveiled on Friday will cut $26 billion from the automaker's massive U.S. pension liability of nearly $109 billion. GM's pension overhang is a top concern for investors. It was one of a handful of issues left untouched during GM's U.S.-financed bankruptcy restructuring three years ago.

(Excerpt) Read more at ca.news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government; US: Michigan
KEYWORDS: gm; liability; pension; uaw
"There are lots of companies with pension plans. Very few have plans in the absolute or relative size as us," Chief Financial Officer Dan Ammann said during a conference call.

"We would like to get back into the category where this is sort of a non-issue for us," Ammann added. "That doesn't mean eliminating it completely, but obviously we've taken a big step in the right direction today."

The automaker also announced a third pension-related move. GM will shift most of its salaried employees and a small number of retirees who started receiving pension benefits on or after December 1, 2011, to a new pension plan that GM will continue to pay for. These retirees are not part of the 118,000 affected by the pension overhaul announced Friday.

GM will buy a group annuity contract from a unit of Prudential Financial Inc , which will pay and manage benefit payments starting in January 2013 to retirees who are ineligible or elect not to take a lump-sum pension buyout.

GM will also offer pension buyouts to about 42,000 retirees and their surviving beneficiaries, who will have until July 20 to make a decision. The company will start sending those offers to eligible retirees next week.

To fund the transaction, GM will shift $29 billion from its pension plan assets to Prudential and put in between $3.5 billion and $4.5 billion in cash. GM's pension shortfall will also narrow by $1 billion.

GM will take a special charge of between $2.5 billion and $3.5 billion in the second half of the year. It will also result in a $200 million non-cash hit to earnings.

"Although the transaction doesn't come cheap, it serves a very important purpose of permanently de-risking 25 percent of GM's U.S. pension obligation," Citi analyst Itay Michaeli said.

The shift to Prudential and the buyouts are expected to be completed at the end of this year. The pension changes do not affect white-collar retirees' eligibility for post-retirement healthcare, life insurance and a vehicle discount.

UAW PENSIONS IN FOCUS

A growing concern for decades as U.S. automakers lost market share to foreign-based automakers in their home country, pension costs became an albatross for the U.S. industry with the sector's downturn five years ago.

Over a 15-year stretch that ended in 2006, GM put $55 billion into its workers' pension plans, compared with $13 billion it paid out in dividends, according to the 2008 book, 'While America Aged" by Roger Lowenstein.

"We will be less exposed to the funding volatility and calls on cash we have experienced in the past, which in turn, will improve our flexibility to deploy cash for alternate uses," Ammann said on Friday.

The announcement is part of a series of steps that GM and its smaller rival Ford Motor Co have taken to manage the risks posed by their pension obligations, which have hit the stock prices and the credit ratings of both automakers.

This summer, Ford will begin offering pension buyouts to the first wave of 98,000 white-collar retirees and former employees who are vested in their pension plan. The move could lop off one-third of Ford's U.S. pension liability.

GM retirees represented by the United Auto Workers union are not affected by Friday's announcement. Hourly retirees account for the bulk of GM's U.S. pension obligation.

Last year, GM and the UAW agreed to discuss ways to cut the risk posed by GM's pension plan during contract negotiations.

During the conference call, Ammann declined to shed light on those talks, beyond saying that pensions were a "significant topic of discussion" during those meetings.

"We have generally agreed with the UAW that we will maintain a dialogue on pensions going forward and continue to look at de-risking alternatives, but anything we discuss with them on that remains private between us and them," Ammann said.

A UAW spokeswoman could not be immediately reached.

GM MOVE COULD TRIGGER OTHERS -FITCH

Ammann said the pension moves represented an "important step" toward GM obtaining an investment-grade credit rating. Fitch Ratings described the changes as "incrementally positive" to GM's rating.

"Today's transaction could spark other companies to consider similar transactions in the future to reduce exposure to plan volatility," Fitch Ratings analyst Stephen Brown said.

Ammann said GM does not have an estimate for how many retirees would likely take the lump-sum offer. The company is offering free independent financial counseling and group meetings for those eligible for lump-sum payments. GM also has established websites to outline the pension changes.

GM has also created two separate call centers to help answer retirees' questions.

Before the pension announcement, GM shares were down as much as 3.4 percent as the automaker posted weaker-than-expected May auto sales.

But the stock recouped its losses and rose as much as 5.1 percent on the news of the pension changes. GM shares closed at $22.01, down slightly less than 1 percent.

(Reporting By Deepa Seetharaman and Ben Klayman; Editing by Bernadette Baum, Carol Bishopric, Gunna Dickson and Jan Paschal)

1 posted on 06/02/2012 3:11:41 PM PDT by taildragger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: taildragger
This would not have been an issue if they had a proper bankruptcy vs. their Obamainated "Structured" one...

Note Ford is working on something in the same vane but very different in their total execution to the point I believe Forbes Magazine said keep your eye on what Ford is doing as it potentially being a template for others in the future...

2 posted on 06/02/2012 3:14:29 PM PDT by taildragger (( Palin / Mulally 2012 ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taildragger

“GM retirees represented by the United Auto Workers union are not affected by Friday’s announcement.”

The cost of socialism. Socialists are the last to be affected.

“Socialism is Legal Plunder” - Frederic Bastiat 1801-1850

For more of the damage they have done...

http://www.usdebtclock.org/


3 posted on 06/02/2012 3:17:12 PM PDT by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taildragger
Ford's portion of that 109 Billion is 46 Billion so theirs is less than GM's...

Their strategies I read are the following...

* Existing Pension Funding Mix is or will be 80/20ish Bond - Stocks and "Self Funding" via their own earning / stock vs relying on the S & P or other index.
* The amount assumed for the buy-outs will be based on the Corp Bond Return of 4.2% which will be the pensioners assumed return in the markets which lower their cost.

After reading "American Icon" ( on Ford's turn around ) their seems to be a centricity of maintaining cash flow and cash on hand. Not just the balance sheet but an internal one if you will where in which pension liabilities are a big detractor. Reducing this liability in that regards looks like job one at this point...

The question begs, if Ford ( and GM ) make their respective deals palatable to white collar workers with a high acceptance rate, will an offer to the respective UAW units be up next ?....

4 posted on 06/02/2012 3:27:07 PM PDT by taildragger (( Palin / Mulally 2012 ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PGalt
The UAW types I know are not socialist, many are probably closet conservatives and can't speak it, but their apparatchiks leaders have to dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st Century.

The last few years w/ the UAW, White Collar have to take it on the chin / shared sacrifice before they get with a like a re-alignment. Never in the driver's seat other than the "VEBA" which was something they "control"....

5 posted on 06/02/2012 3:32:04 PM PDT by taildragger (( Palin / Mulally 2012 ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: taildragger
The rank and file are just pawns. The leaders are socialists who only care about collecting dues and acquiring political power.
6 posted on 06/02/2012 3:37:09 PM PDT by Hugin ("Most times a man'll tell you his bad intentions, if you listen and let yourself hear."---Open Range)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: taildragger

And the UAW thieves are salivating because they got a pass on the pension cuts. Union people are immune from reality.


7 posted on 06/02/2012 3:55:21 PM PDT by MasterGunner01 (11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taildragger
The UAW types I know are not socialist...

I have several UAW friends who are not socialist and others that I question (it takes a good philosophical discussion however). These individuals have always held a subordinate position to the collective. The cost of FORCED anything, I suppose...

8 posted on 06/02/2012 4:02:48 PM PDT by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: taildragger

http://www.unionconservatives.com/


9 posted on 06/02/2012 4:12:17 PM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: PGalt
“Socialism is Legal Plunder” - Frederic Bastiat 1801-1850

Hear! Hear!

Labor unions are the most visible vestige of America's flirtation with socialism. If not outlawed altogether, all government support for them should be withdrawn.

10 posted on 06/02/2012 4:25:18 PM PDT by BfloGuy (The final outcome of the credit expansion is general impoverishment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: PGalt

I personally think forced unionization will be the downfall of unions. I know I was never happy about it when I was AFL-CIO.


11 posted on 06/02/2012 4:32:18 PM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
Same here. I had to join the Teamsters Union to work as a vendor at a MLB stadium. Not a driver, a $50 per game vendor. And my monthly dues were $50. So I got to work a shift per month for my tremendous "benefit" of being a union member.

Not sure how other unions are run, but the Teamsters are 99.9% thug-run.

12 posted on 06/02/2012 4:42:08 PM PDT by boop (I hate hippies and dopeheads. Just hate them. ...Ernest Borgnine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: taildragger
GM retirees represented by the United Auto Workers union are not affected by Friday's announcement.

Well - of course not...

13 posted on 06/02/2012 5:07:42 PM PDT by smokingfrog ( sleep with one eye open (<o> ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taildragger

How much were union dues reduced?


14 posted on 06/02/2012 5:31:24 PM PDT by NoLibZone (I trust Sarah Palin, Dick Cheney, Cain, Perry, Bachman : I trust their judgment on their 2012 pick.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taildragger
This would not have been an issue if they had a proper bankruptcy vs. their Obamainated "Structured" one...

Damn, you are in my head. That was my very first thought here.

15 posted on 06/02/2012 9:34:06 PM PDT by Lysandru
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: taildragger
This would not have been an issue if they had a proper bankruptcy vs. their Obamainated "Structured" one...

Damn, you are in my head. That was my very first thought here.

16 posted on 06/02/2012 9:34:13 PM PDT by Lysandru
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

I personally think forced unionization will be the downfall of unions. I know I was never happy about it when I was AFL-CIO.


I was never in the union being an exempt employee, but I can say that the union people at my place of employment were some of the most vicious backstabbers amongst themselves. It all came down to seniority and the newest members got the shaft every time when it came down to a dispute between them over anything.


17 posted on 06/03/2012 4:10:04 AM PDT by The Working Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson