General Motors Canada Pension Plan Faces $2.2 Billion Deficit

Derek Kreindler
by Derek Kreindler

Even after Canadian taxpayers contributed $3.2 billion (Canadian) to General Motors’ pension fund after GM’s bankruptcy proceedings in 2009, the company’s pension fund for unionized employees is still short $2.2 billion – a fair amount for a plan that’s responsible for 30,000 employees.

The pension plan deficit was a key factor in GM’s pitch to the Ontario and Canadian federal governments when asking for bailout funds. Canadian taxpayers ended up providing $10.6 billion out of the $60 billion bailout package. Before we get to cries of “Government Motors” and “picking winners”, the problem appears to be deeper than just GM’s own finances. Pension plans are a big players in Canada’s finance scene (the Ontario Teacher’s Pension Plan and the Canada Pension Plan are among the juggernauts) but lately, low interest rates and increasing lifespan have hampered the returns delivered by pension funds.

The deficit was calculated by an actuary commissioned by the Canadian Auto Workers Union. Based on the value of the plan’s assets and liabilities if it were to be wound down during the date of calculation. Benefits for workers, retirees and surviving spouses would have been slashed by over 33 percent. To make matters worse, GM has seen the number of active workers fall as its number of retirees collecting benefits has risen, a ratio that will only increase in the future.

This trend is not confined solely to GM. Companies like Air Canada and Canadian Pacific Railway are facing similar issues relating to worker/retiree ratios, and GM’s story is indicative of another disturbing precedent – that the public may be forced to foot the bill for a bankrupt corporation’s weak pension plan, whether directly or through the government administered Ontario Pension Benefits Guarantee Fund. GM and the CAW are due to start labor negotiations this summer – look for the issue of pensions to be a major one.

Derek Kreindler
Derek Kreindler

More by Derek Kreindler

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 14 comments
  • Halftruth Halftruth on Feb 23, 2012

    Bailout part two? It is tiring to hear this over and over. GM, The Post Office and State gov'ts all crying that their pension plans are underfunded. When does this BS end? We certainly cannot live this way, how the hell can they.. repeatedly?

  • DC Bruce DC Bruce on Feb 23, 2012

    There are usually two problems with "under-funded" pension plans. Problem #1 is that the employer didn't put enough money in the plan in the first place (this is the problem which affects many U.S. state and local governments). Problem #2 is that return on pension investments are below expectations. Either way, actuaries continuously re-calculate the amount of assets needed to pay the promised pensions to retirees, based on both what is promised to those retirees, and projected future returns. When any of these get out of whack, then the plan is said to be "underfunded." IIRC, in the U.S. private employers are required to remedy underfunding of pension plans. Sadly, public employers are not. So, what you have is politicians promising rich retirement benefits without being required to tell the voters the cost of paying for them. With increased job mobility, the whole premise of pension plans -- lifetime employment with one employer -- is crumbling. (Although union pension plans are an exception to that, so long as the worker continues doing union work.) The sad thing is that, in the U.S. at least, various tax-deferred self-funded retirement plans are woefully inadequate. If a U.S. worker contributes the maximum to a 401(k) plan and his employer matches it, the resulting accumulation of wealth will not fund any kind of a decent retirement. So, people who want a retirement equal to the kind provided by old-style pensions, have to fund it using a substantial amount of after-tax money. Think about this: the recommended withdrawal rate from a retirement "nest egg" is 4 percent. At that rate, you can be confident that you won't run out of money before you die. So, using those numbers, funding a $40,000 pension takes a $1M "nest egg." You can do a little better by purchasing an annuity, but that leaves nothing for your heirs.

  • El scotto They should be supping with a very, very long spoon.
  • El scotto [list=1][*]Please make an EV that's not butt-ugly. Not Jaguar gorgeous but Buick handsome will do.[/*][*] For all the golf cart dudes: A Tesla S in Plaid mode will be the fastest ride you'll ever take.[/*][*]We have actual EV owners posting on here. Just calmly stated facts and real world experience. This always seems to bring out those who would argue math.[/*][/list=1]For some people an EV will never do, too far out in the country, taking trips where an EV will need recharged, etc. If you own a home and can charge overnight an EV makes perfect sense. You're refueling while you're sleeping.My condo association is allowing owners to install chargers. You have to pay all of the owners of the parking spaces the new electric service will cross. Suggested fee is 100$ and the one getting a charger pays all the legal and filing fees. I held out for a bottle of 30 year old single malt.Perhaps high end apartments will feature reserved parking spaces with chargers in the future. Until then non home owners are relying on public charge and one of my neighbors is in IT and he charges at work. It's call a perk.I don't see company owned delivery vehicles that are EV's. The USPS and the smiley boxes should be the 1st to do this. Nor are any of our mega car dealerships doing this and but of course advertising this fact.I think a great many of the EV haters haven't came to the self-actualization that no one really cares what you drive. I can respect and appreciate what you drive but if I was pushed to answer, no I really don't care what you drive. Before everyone goes into umbrage over my last sentence, I still like cars. Especially yours.I have heated tiles in my bathroom and my kitchen. The two places you're most likely to be barefoot. An EV may fall into to the one less thing to mess with for many people.Macallan for those who were wondering.
  • EBFlex The way things look in the next 5-10 years no. There are no breakthroughs in battery technology coming, the charging infrastructure is essentially nonexistent, and the price of entry is still way too high.As soon as an EV can meet the bar set by ICE in range, refueling times, and price it will take off.
  • Jalop1991 Way to bury the lead. "Toyota to offer two EVs in the states"!
  • Jalop1991 I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that.
Next