Viewing page 84 of 200

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

-3-

Many of the statements in this letter directly contradict statements made in the "Blue Book" explaining the Retirement Act. You are invited to personally read the Act and determine for yourself which is correct. Consider the "Blue Book" on Page 12, Line 3, which states: "The incomes will average about three times as much as social security." To this should be added "and will cost you 7-3/4 times as much as social security."

A strong argument against the Act is that the pilot does not receive enough for his money. Look at this: If a pilot paid a tax under this Act which would entitle him to a $67 a month pension when he is 50, he could have bought for the same cost, protection from a legitimate insurance company which would provide a monthly pension of $76. Wait a minute though, his employer has also been taxed an equal sum for the pilots benefit, therefore if both the pilot and employer had purchased insurance he would receive $152 per month instead of the $67 provided by the Act.

There is reason to believe that an attempt is being made to "railroad" approval of this Act by ALPA. Your pay will be out 7-3/4%. Are you satisfied with the meager protection your money will purchase under this Act? Approval or rejection of this Act must be by an honest, written, roll call vote of ever member of ALPA. Insist in your rights! Don't let someone else take a big slice of your wages without proving conclusively that he is really giving you your money's worth.

This letter does not mean to condemn all pension plans. It condemns this particular plan. We need protection against the dangers of busting a physical or busting up an airplane, but this Act does not provide such protection.

Yours very truly,
/a/ R. A. Stone
Capt. Robert A Stone
United Air Lines