Union Pension Bailout is Coming

Americans with 401(k) plans in stocks have been feeling queasy for months as they've watched their savings vanish at alarming rates. But workers covered by traditional pension plans -- the ones 100% funded and managed by companies for employees -- have so far avoided that sinking feeling. Unlike the 401(k) crowd, they don't get monthly statements bearing the grim news of the lousy performance of the investments in their pension plans. But with stocks and bonds crushed, many of these old-school defined-benefit plans now look downright wobbly. If the economic weakness continues long enough, many could end up in the hands of the independent government agency responsible for taking over failing plans. * Talk back: Are you worried about an impending pension crisis? This would mean that, down the road, the agency would likely ask for a $50 billion to $100 billion boost from tax dollars, experts say. That's right: This would affect you even if you didn't have a traditional pension plan. It's the looming bailout no one is talking about. Grim statistics Companies offering defined-benefit plans set aside what they think is enough money and then invest it -- often in a roughly 60-30 split between stocks and bonds, putting the rest in other assets, including real estate. A study released last week by Credit Suisse (CS, news, msgs) leaves little doubt these plans have been pounded by bad performance of both stocks and bonds, creating potential troubles for the more than 34 million workers in the private sector who count on these plans. Consider these grim statistics: * The funding level of defined-benefit retirement plans at companies in the S&P 500 Index ($INX) alone has dropped by an astonishing $265 billion this year, according to the study by David Zion, an analyst and accounting expert with Credit Suisse. * These plans, at companies such as General Motors , Ford Motor and Unisys, are now short about $204 billion of the funds they need to cover the projected costs of pensions over the lifetime of those plans. That's a lot of money to make up. * About 340 of the S&P 500 companies now have plans with shortfalls. And 227 of them -- almost half -- have plans that are less than 80% funded. That's a 266% increase from the 62 companies in 2007 with plans that were less than 80% funded. Which companies have the biggest problems? Not surprisingly, General Motors and Ford top the list. Much of the talk in favor of allowing the big automakers to go into bankruptcy centers on how it would let them shed pension obligations. Guess who gets the bill if they do. Unisys, which offers information technology to governments and the private sector, also places high. These three now have pension fund shortfalls equal to anywhere from about 80% to 180% of their market capitalizations, by Zion's calculations. The most underfunded pension plans Ford Motor Unisys General Motors Goodyear Tire & Rubber This will give you some sense of the extraordinary size of the pension promises to employees by GM, Ford and Unisys: Current estimates place the pension promises at anywhere from 1,000% to 3,000% of their market caps. Biggest total pension promises* Company Total pension promises (in billions) Market cap (in billions)Pension promises General Motors $96.2 billion Ford Motor $63.5 billion Unisys $8.2 billion Goodyear Tire & Rubber $7.2 billion Eastman Kodak $8.1 billion *As a percentage of market cap, as of Nov. 5. Source: Credit Suisse. Digging out of a hole Will these three companies and others with big shortfalls be able to dig out of the hole? That depends on two things: * How the market performs, since much of the pension money is invested. * Whether their own businesses do well enough so that they can make enough money to support the plans. "The bigger question is how viable is the sponsoring organization," says Jon Waite of SEI, a consultancy for defined-benefits-plan sponsors. If the current lousy market continues long enough, prospects aren't good. That's because those companies with the biggest pension woes face bleak outlooks: * Things are so tough at Ford, GM and Chrysler that the companies are going hat in hands to the government for help. * Unisys continues to "meaningfully underperform" its peers, and trimming designed to boost cash flow may cost the company long-term growth, says Jefferies (JEF, news, msgs) analyst Joseph Vafi. * As for Goodyear Tire & Rubber (GT, news, msgs), "competitive pressure and a high cost structure make consistent profitability a tough goal for this no-moat tire maker," says Morningstar (MORN, news, msgs) analyst Min Ye. * Deutsche Bank (DB, news, msgs) analyst Chris Whitmore has a "sell" rating on Eastman Kodak (EK, news, msgs), citing challenges to its consumer digital imaging and graphic communications businesses, where the growth was supposed to come from, as well as continuing declines in its film business. A Goodyear spokesman responded that the company has contributed more than $2.3 billion to its pension funds over the past five years, "establishing a track record of meeting every obligation under circumstances similar to today's, and we have every intention of continuing to meet those obligations." Eastman Kodak said its U.S. pension plans remain fully funded despite recent market declines. "We are not at all concerned that the PBGC (Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp.) will need to become involved in the fulfillment of Kodak's U.S. pension obligations," a spokesman said. "None of our plan participants should have any concerns about Kodak's ability to meet its obligations." Ford and GM said that their pension plans were overfunded as of the end of last year and that they will update the funding status in a few months. Unisys declined to comment. Big pension bailout down the road? If these companies fail -- simply can't meet pension obligations -- their plans would be taken over by the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. The PBGC was created by Congress in 1974 to deal with failed plans. If history is any guide, about 85% of workers may still get what they were promised. The rest would take some sort of cut. Workers expecting huge pensions or those that retire early typically face the biggest cuts. The other good news is that analysts such as SEI's Waite are certain that even if the Big Three automakers send their pension plans to the PBGC, it wouldn't cause so much damage that the PBGC would have to turn to taxpayers for help – at least not right away. The reason, explains PBGC spokesman Jeffrey Speicher, is that the agency would take over the automakers' assets in the pension plans. Though pension payouts are spread out over decades, the assets arrive all at once. The upshot: There would be no short-term cash crunch. But long term, it's a different story, say pension experts such as Jeffrey Brown, a finance professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, who's been predicting a need for a PBGC bailout at some point. If too many plans wind up with the agency because of the current economy, that bailout will be needed much sooner. Here's the problem: The PBGC is responsible for coming up with the money it pays out in pensions -- now about $4.3 billion a year. It does this by collecting premiums from companies that run defined benefit pension plans (about $1.4 billion a year). It also gets the assets when it takes over a plan and earns money on those assets. But the PBGC is in trouble for several reasons, Brown believes. First, the number of companies with old-school pension plans is shrinking. So premiums will shrink, too. Next, unlike private-sector insurance companies, the PBGC doesn't charge higher premiums to companies with riskier plans. It shortchanges itself by letting everyone pay the same amount. Finally, when the PBGC takes over bad pension plans, not enough assets come along to support the failed plans. The PBGC already has a $10.7 billion long-term deficit, which may actually be higher because of some generous assumptions that go into that calculation. Now with stock market in the tank, the PBGC "doomsday scenario" outlined 20 years ago by Boston University's Zvi Bodie may play out. In Bodie's scenario, a sharp and prolonged drop in stock prices forces lots of companies to default on underfunded plans. The forces the PBGC to significantly raise premiums on the remaining plans in the system, creating more trouble. Then it needs direct cash from taxpayers, which it doesn't get now. * Tell us: Will the tough times get worse? "I don't see any way that the PBGC will be able to avoid eventually having an infusion of taxpayer dollars," Brown says. "Over the next decade, we could easily end up with another $50 billion to $100 billion or more of taxpayer money needed for a bailout -- in this case the bailout of failed corporate pension plans that didn't put adequate money aside." No doubt workers would also be asked to share the burden by accepting lower pension payouts. The bosses are doing fine, thank you Even if the most underfunded pension plans do manage to survive, there's still a glaring inequity built into all this. While workers covered by defined-benefit plans who retire in their mid-60s usually get pensions in the $50,000-a-year range, it's another matter for the top execs at these companies. They're covered by supplemental executive retirement plans, or SERPs, which pay out as much as 400 times what workers can get. The CEOs at General Motors, Goodyear and Eastman Kodak are looking forward to SERPs that will be worth $20.5 million, $11.5 million and $6.5 million, respectively, when they retire, according to The Corporate Library. That's on top of the millions a year they pull down in annual pay. Oh, and these aren't self-funded plans, like the 401(k)s which have supplanted traditional pensions for most of us. On average, CEOs at S&P 500 companies can expect total retirement benefits -- SERPs and other plans -- of $10.1 million each, according to The Corporate Library. The highest amount, $60.3 million, is slated to go to ConocoPhillips (COP, news, msgs) chief James Mulva. The second-highest, $52.3 million, awaits Bank of America's (BAC, news, msgs) Kenneth Lewis. Of course, to get that pension, Bank of America will have to survive. So personally, Lewis is probably happy that his bank is one of those getting government bailout money. "Given the level of compensation CEOs are earning, I cannot understand what justification there is for an employer to need to supplement their lifestyle in retirement," says Paul Hodgson, an executive compensation expert with The Corporate Library. There is one way to avoid this mess. Back in 2002, when the stock market was equally in the tank, defined-benefit plans had the same level of underfunding as they have today. As the stock market rebounded, the problem took care of itself -- something Waite at SEI says could happen this time, too. But for that to work, you have to believe that the financial sector will repair itself quickly enough that the market will recoup near-50% losses in time to save troubled pension plans. A year into this credit market mess, major banks such as Citigroup (C, news, msgs) are still in the process of getting saved by the government. That suggests there is still a lot more trouble to come, and we might not be so lucky this time around.