Posted by George Cuthbertson on 19 February 2001 at 10:19:29:
In Reply to: The oxygen of Publicity posted by Mike Barratt on 16 February 2001 at 21:58:40:
I have been keeping in touch with various discussion threads which on the
whole seem well balanced and constructive. This said, I feel that this
thread proposes the best course of action to achieve the desired result.
It seems to me that the question of legality is one we are unlikely to
win.
IBM have a track record of success in handling adverse litigation and
this
looks like a pretty murky legal quagmire. The Barclays ruling serves
to
demonstrate how difficult it will be to win the legal argument. Using
the
ombudsman is still the right thing to do however - it may get a result
but
if it doesn't then it can be used to bolster the moral argument.
Where I take umbrage with IBM is that they are removing funds from the
C
Plan surplus while at the same time treating retirees poorly. If IBM
had
changed the C Plan to guarantee annual increases of RPI/5% then I don't
think there would have been any of the current backlash. As long as they
treat the retirees well then I have no objection to IBM using all
legal
means to improve their financial results, including movement of
surplus
pension funds.
I agree with Mike Barratt that the best way to influence IBM's actions
is
to get as much adverse publicity into the public domain as possible
-
letters to the press, articles in the quality press, television consumer
programmes, etc.
By all means pursue the legal and political routes - if nothing else
it
seems that the law should be changed to bolster pensioner rights even
more - but this is a long and very slow process. The best chance to get
a
quick result is to go public very loudly.