You have hit on one very important topic; The Pension Protection Act. I wish some serious journalist would take a look at what this mis-named Act has done to employees, companies and pensions.

What may have been a well-intentioned attempt to protect workers’ pensions has put impossible demands, expectations and assumptions on pension funds to the point where the options for funds are few and difficult.

When funds were able to base their actuarial assumptions over longer terms, which is reasonable it is a pension after all, they had much more flexibility in funding and benefit changes. The new requirements to ensure full funding in as little as seven years has hurt more that it has helped. The damage to pension benefits has been devastating and more companies are bailing out and paying the withdrawal liabilities, which can be paid over 20 or 25 years, or doing as amused suggests and dumping it on the PBGC.

If this law is not changed, many jobs could be lost and companies will go out of business just as a result of the crushing pension liability exacerbated by this law.

Yeah, I know, numbers make journalists’ heads hurt, but this spitback reporting that consists of sticking in a few words about “unfunded pension liability” is horrendous journalism, since the liability is not explained, nor is there any discussion or explanation of the legal requirements on the company to correct the problem. We don’t know if the numbers refer to an unfunded liability payable over retirees lifetimes, or if the 2006 Act imposes substantial funding requirements in the near-term.

This is especially relevant in the case of Platinum, which isn’t in the business of publishing newspapes. It is in the asset-mining business. Would the Platinum strip the Globe of its assets and find a way to liquidate prior to the pension-funding deadline set by the 2006 Act, thus passing along the pension liability to the Pension Guaranty Corp?

Before journalists pat themselves on the back on any reporting on this story, at least one of them ought to take a serious look at the pension issue, and not hide behind what they think they know about pensions based on reporting they have read about the government’s unfunded liabilities. The issue is bigger than that, and greater exploration should have been made of the implications of a sale to a company such as Platinum which is interested in acquiring and stripping assets and avoiding liabilities. Somebody should have looked into whether a Platinum purchase would put the Pension Guaranty Corp. in the on-deck circle. Instead, we see the all-too-typical cut-and-paste on a significant part of this story. Where does the union stand on the need for pension funding?

Incredibly poor reporting on this front.

A quiet reminder. He in his shirt is still a lot more successful in his chosen profession than you are in yours.

Maybe it’s time for you to take off your glasses and unbutton your shirt.

If people were expecting any thing other than that they were mistaken. Conditions and benefits will improve when, and if, the Company improves.