Visitors since 3-22-2000

FastCounter by bCentral

All of the following information is substantiated by copies of ACTUAL documents. These documents provide irrefutable evidence that pilots and their beneficiaries are told by a major airline that they are protected under ERISA- - -when this is NOT the case.

If you would like more information, contact Patricia Heald (e-mail link), a pilot's widow, who is being denied benefits from her deceased husband's retirement program.

TWA's Retirement Plan for Pilots states in writing that it is operated under ERISA (Employee Retirement Income Security Act --a law passed by Congress in 1974) {link to documents} which guarantees employees/beneficiaries specific rights -- including the right to sue in court.

BUT, when sued in Federal Court by Patricia Heald, widow of Captain William K. Heald (picture link), TWA 'about faced' and claimed its Retirement Plan for Pilots is NOT regulated by ERISA, but -- instead -- is governed by the RAILWAY LABOR ACT -- and asserted the COURT HAD NO JURISDICTION OVER THE PLAN. {link to documents}

THE JUDGE, AGREEING WITH THE DEFENDANTS NEW ASSERTION, RULED THE CASE COULD NOT BE HEARD FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION.{link to documents}

• When Patricia Heald requested arbitration, she found that -- contrary to popular belief -- under the RAILWAY LABOR ACT, employees/beneficiaries are NOT automatically entitled to arbitration.



• And even worse, TWA employees get a double whammy: TWA's Retirement Plan for Pilots is ALSO a SELF-FUNDED PROGRAM, and thus a A LAW UNTO THEMSELVES.



• When TWA's "In-House Retirement Board" refuses to pay benefits, employees/beneficiaries have no legal recourse -- anywhere!
{link to documents}


• Not even the National Mediation Board in Washington, D.C. can invoke arbitration.

FACT:   TWA EMPLOYEES AND BENEFICIARIES HAVE NO LEGAL PROTECTION OF RETIREMENT BENEFITS!

QUESTION???

This is Patricia Heald's perspective on the sequence of events:

1. TWA spent 2 years, first ignoring her requests for paper work, then resisting and delaying her review by the "In-House" Retirement Board, continuing to state in writing that they operate under ERISA while, Mrs. Heald believes, arrogantly and blatantly violating both ERISA and their own regulations.
{link to documents}


2. After exhausting all in-house processes as dictated by ERISA, Mrs. Heald sued under ERISA in Federal Court. Through months of the discovery process, TWA submitted documents to the court attesting they operate under ERISA and agreed that the court had jurisdiction under ERISA, too.
{link to documents}


3. Only weeks before the trial date, and AFTER the discovery process was completed, TWA made a Motion for Summary Judgment, declaring TWA was NOT under ERISA -- but under the RAILWAY LABOR ACT.

{link to documents}


4. On December 2, 1997, the judge concurred that the court had no jurisdiction over the RAILWAY LABOR ACT.



5. Mrs. Heald then pursued Arbitration, in vain.  Ultimately, the same lawyer who represented TWA in her lawsuit spoke for BOTH TWA AND THE UNION in rejecting her request.
   • Is this not a conflict of interest?
   
   
6. Mrs. Heald then appealed to the National Mediation Board in Washington, D.C., only to find that in cases involving the RAILWAY LABOR ACT, the Board cannot invoke arbitration.

DESPITE WHAT TWA STATES IN ITS RETIREMENT PLAN FOR PILOTS, THE TRUTH IS:

• TWA, AS A SELF-FUNDED PLAN UNDER THE RAILWAY LABOR ACT, CANNOT BE FORCED TO ARBITRATION -- EVEN BY THE NATIONAL MEDIATION BOARD.



• NO MATTER WHAT "RIGHTS" EMPLOYEES/BENEFICIARIES ARE LED TO BELIEVE THEY HAVE, TWA IS A LAW UNTO ITSELF -- FLAGRANTLY AND WILLFULLY ASSURING ITS EMPLOYEES OTHERWISE.



• THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME TWA PULLED THE RAILWAY LABOR ACT "OUT OF THE HAT" IN COURT WHEN SUED UNDER ERISA -- COURT RECORDS DOCUMENT THIS HAPPENED PRIOR TO THE ABOVE CASE.



• BOTH 'A' & 'B' RETIREMENT PLANS ARE WORTHY OF CRITICAL SCRUTINY.


• {Plan A - Annuity}        {Plan B Article from TWA MEC}
  Compare the 'Retirement Plan' with a regular, old savings account accruing compounded interest & insured by the FDIC and that's in YOUR control.
• "WOULD YOU PUT YOUR - MONEY- IN A BANK RUN LIKE THIS?

BASIC FACTS RE: 'SELF-FUNDED' PLANS & THE RAILWAY LABOR ACT

TWA SERVES A 'DOUBLE WHAMMY' TO ANYONE DISPUTING BENEFITS:

"The National Mediation Board's responsibility under the Railway Labor Act, with respect to Airline System Boards of Adjustment is purely ministerial. As such, the Board does not have authority to place into motion or invoke arbitration proceedings."

So who comprises the TWA 'System Board of Adjustment' aka 'The Retirement Board?' An even number: 4, with 2 representatives from the Company and the Union. Question - "Who breaks a tie?" Or did they know from the start there would be NO 'REAL' vote, anyway?

In Patricia Heald's case, the Union Reps were Captains W.A. Murphy & H.O. Van Zandt. Company Reps were: Lou Banks & Larry Cleveland, the Manager & Director of the Employee Dept. who had already denied her benefits!! Isn't this like going to court to argue a traffic ticket only to find the Judge is the same Police Officer who ticketed you in the 1st place?

And though the Retirement Plan stipulates appeals procedure, the Board violated the decisions deadline by months & then never cited the provisions they used to reach their decision.

Upon request for the provision information, along with the date & place of the meeting, Larry Cleveland wrote on May 22, 1996: "(The Plan)....DOES NOT REQUIRE any additional documentation other than notice of the decision reached."

1. HOW TO FIND OUT IF YOUR COMPANY FOLLOWS ERISA REGULATIONS - ANYWAY

2. HOW PATRICIA HEALD UNCOVERED - LAYER BY LAYER - WHAT SHE BELIEVES IS RUTHLESS FRAUD EFFECTING COUNTLESS EMPLOYEES AND THEIR BENEFICIARIES

Copyright © 2000 -- Patricia Drake

Developed by:
Graham Computer Services

Latest Revision 9-2-2000