Pensioners: TAKE THE DEAL

[corktownyuppie]

The Court approved the swaps settlement.

The earlier you get on board, the better the deal gets. The longer you take, the more likely other classes of creditors settle out and leave even less for you.

With today's ruling, there exist enough creditors in favor the bankruptcy plan that the Court can do a "cram down" and force everyone else to hold their nose and swallow.

I feel very bad for the pensioners. And their leadership is accustomed to two-party negotiations. This is a totally different ballpark, and you've got multiple creditors negotiating for the same pie.

Don't make it any worse than it has to get.

http://www.freep.com/article/2014041...ion-bankruptcy

[Detroitnerd]

What BS. Somebody FUCKS YOU OVER, you go to court through your imposed proxy, and he proposes a deal to PAY OFF THE PEOPLE WHO FUCKED YOU OVER. The judge says you should sue and the settlement is too generous, and your proxy says, no, he'd rather take a deal to pay the PEOPLE WHO FUCKED YOU OVER." The judge again says you should sue and the settlement is too generous and your proxy still wants to pay the PEOPLE WHO FUCKED YOU OVER. Finally, after much wrangling, the judge rules to pay these CRIMINALS and majority of people, led around by the nose by the media, cheer.

Disgusting.

[corktownyuppie]

Yeah, so says you. There are 7 other competing sides to this story, and it's not at all clear who would win. But hey, no one has to take any deal.

I'm just saying that the longer you wait, the worse the deal can get.

[Wesley Mouch]

What BS. Somebody FUCKS YOU OVER, you go to court through your imposed proxy, and he proposes a deal to PAY OFF THE PEOPLE WHO FUCKED YOU OVER. The judge says you should sue and the settlement is too generous, and your proxy says, no, he'd rather take a deal to pay the PEOPLE WHO FUCKED YOU OVER." The judge again says you should sue and the settlement is too generous and your proxy still wants to pay the PEOPLE WHO FUCKED YOU OVER. Finally, after much wrangling, the judge rules to pay these CRIMINALS and majority of people, led around by the nose by the media, cheer.

Disgusting.

Where do you factor in the self-'FUCKING OVER' by the pension trustees and their 'workers invest with us to screw current pensioners' plan?

[Detroitnerd]

Where do you factor in the self-'FUCKING OVER' by the pension trustees and their 'workers invest with us to screw current pensioners' plan?

Hey, not to soft-pedal that either. But they might have just been FUCKING MORONS, whereas we have evidence that the big banks were able to fix the very things they proposed the city bet upon. If your idiot cousin brings you to his idiot cousin's casino and you find out the house was rigged from the beginning, do you blame your cousin and focus on him? Or fight the house that fixed your bets against you?

This is the kind of stuff that should make all decent people puke with rage.

[corktownyuppie]

If your idiot cousin brings you to his idiot cousin's casino and you find out the house was rigged from the beginning, do you blame your cousin and focus on him? Or fight the house that fixed your bets against you?

This is the kind of stuff that should make all decent people puke with rage.

Hey, I'm with you on the LIBOR nonsense. That is/was ridiculous. The question is could we prove it in court. That's a totally different standard to overcome, and as you mention, the idiot cousin[[s) we elected to run the ship don't make it any easier.

[313WX]

What BS. Somebody FUCKS YOU OVER, you go to court through your imposed proxy, and he proposes a deal to PAY OFF THE PEOPLE WHO FUCKED YOU OVER. The judge says you should sue and the settlement is too generous, and your proxy says, no, he'd rather take a deal to pay the PEOPLE WHO FUCKED YOU OVER." The judge again says you should sue and the settlement is too generous and your proxy still wants to pay the PEOPLE WHO FUCKED YOU OVER. Finally, after much wrangling, the judge rules to pay these CRIMINALS and majority of people, led around by the nose by the media, cheer.

Disgusting.

The name of the game right now is to simply get Detroit out of bankruptcy court ASAP before Orr leaves, by any means necessary.

[corktownyuppie]

The name of the game right now is to simply get Detroit out of bankruptcy court ASAP before Orr leaves, by any means necessary.

Orr was recently interviewed and said that after working on this bankruptcy case, any small possibility of him running for public office has been totally extinguished. The way I was interpreting his remarks, I bet this whole process was far more frustrating for him than he ever thought it would be.

Politics in his future? Detroit case has "done me in", Orr says

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/...0N212220140410

Could you imagine if we need City Council and the Mayor to agree on any settlement? We'd be in court for a decade without anything getting done.

[Detroitnerd]

Orr was recently interviewed and said that after working on this bankruptcy case, any small possibility of him running for public office has been totally extinguished.

Save your crocodile tears, CTY. He was scheduled to return to his native Florida, head up a new office for his high-powered firm, and buy a Lamborghini convertible, not run for office. I seriously doubt somebody excited about the high life is much interested in a civil servant's salary ...

[corktownyuppie]

Save your crocodile tears, CTY. He was scheduled to return to his native Florida, head up a new office for his high-powered firm, and buy a Lamborghini convertible, not run for office. I seriously doubt somebody excited about the high life is much interested in a civil servant's salary ...

The tears weren't for him. The tears are because there is no easy way out of this process to the point that the people who are highly trained to do it are expressing that the whole process is mind-numbingly frustrating because of the politics.

And I totally agree.

When this thing is over, everything will end up pretty much everyone thought this was going to go. But if people wanna spend 24 mos. trying to fight it the whole way, be my guest.

[Honky Tonk]

I think I read somewhere in the story, the deal was orchestrated by Mr. Kilpatrick, [[read COD) bad advice maybe?

[corktownyuppie]

I think I read somewhere in the story, the deal was orchestrated by Mr. Kilpatrick, [[read COD) bad advice maybe?

I am giving Kilpatrick the benefit of the doubt on this one. This was always a tricky deal to pull off, and it was certainly on the edge of plausibility...which is why litigating this is so tough. It really could go either way. And, at the time, no one really thought that it could get all the way to bankruptcy.

Rhodes put the hammer down and states that this isn't a popularity contest. It's a legal contest. So rather than argue whether or not the deal was legal, it's pretty much decided that we'll never know for sure, and that both parties agreed to satisfactory terms to put it aside.

Rhodes urged both sides to reconsider their strategies and resume negotiations.
“This bankruptcy case is not about who wins in the court of public opinion,” Rhodes said.

From The Detroit News: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2...#ixzz2yapONh23

[Detroitnerd]

Well, you'll never be MY lawyer CTY.

[Detroitnerd]

Again, the problem comes clearly into focus: The banks, the bond insurers and the ratings agencies all have too much power. If regulations hadn't been gutted and if the feds were serious about prosecuting white-collar crime instead of coddling these criminals, and if for-sale politicians weren't riding into office on a flood of corporate money NONE OF THIS WOULD HAVE HAPPENED. Grrrrr ...

[Hermod]

Again, the problem comes clearly into focus: The banks, the bond insurers and the ratings agencies all have too much power. If regulations hadn't been gutted and if the feds were serious about prosecuting white-collar crime instead of coddling these criminals, and if for-sale politicians weren't riding into office on a flood of corporate money NONE OF THIS WOULD HAVE HAPPENED. Grrrrr ...

Wow, I didn't know that having a DWSD bond in my retirement portfolio was a criminal act.

[Cliffy]

I'm sure Orr is upset that his law firm has a bunch of billable hours and his dreams of becoming the local dog catcher in Detroit are over.

[BankruptcyGuy]

If I may add a couple of points to this discussion:

1. Libor rigging and the swaps deals have absolutely, positively nothing to do with each other. Libor rigging, as alleged, suggested that traders would get the survey-responders [[Libor is, after all, a survey, and not a government benchmark) to adjust answers to the survey by a few basis points to make money on trades. A basis point is one-one hundredth of one percent--0.01%. The amount the swaps were underwater [[that is, paying a fixed rate higher than the comparable floating rate) to the tune of 5-6%, or 500-600 basis points. The two things have [[virtually) nothing to do with each other.

2. With all due respect to Jerome Goldberg, the city stood a relatively low chance of winning the argument that the swaps would be invalidated. In addition, there is the cost and time of litigation that would follow. Judge Rhodes threw the creditors a HUGE bone by beating on the counterparties [[other side of the swap) the first two times. There is a BIG difference between making a political statement that banks were responsible for the housing crisis [[and that's related to the swaps how, exactly?) and actually proving it in court. If anyone wanted to go there [[and few will, except if they're running for office), the other side might point out that a) in each case of a home loan, there was a borrower taking the money, just like the City was happy to take the loan proceeds from the CoPs, and b) Detroit was ground zero for mortgage fraud, with tens of thousands of fraudulent applications and appraisals and debts that have never been repaid. Judge not, lest ye be judged yourself.

3. I'm pretty sure that I wrote that what might happened has happened: namely, that the pensioners are once again receiving poor advice. They have hired representatives who are experienced with unions and union negotiations, not bankruptcy counsel. Normally, in a union negotiation, a futile negotiation leads to two results for a union: a) you're stuck with the same terms that you had in your previous contract, and b) you can go on strike to force the other side to move. Most times, that's not so bad. In bankruptcy cases, THIS IS NOT WHAT HAPPENS. [[sorry for the screaming) Ask the folks at Hostess. Or countless steel or airline employees. I don't know if the unions don't trust anyone else, or if they don't know any better. But simply holding out for a better deal could leave them as the last holdout, and that person will be given the deal to which the rest of the parties have agreed.

[professorscott]

But simply holding out for a better deal could leave them as the last holdout, and that person will be given the deal to which the rest of the parties have agreed.

That sentence is absolutely critical and deserves to be reposted. The advice to the unions, I think, is: do unto others before they do unto you. And it's actually too late for that now, for the most part; replace "before" with "while" and it's closer to the mid-April truth. And I believe Judge Rhodes has now explicitly stated that the so-called, and delightfully named, cram-down is very much on the table.

[corktownyuppie]

In bankruptcy cases, THIS IS NOT WHAT HAPPENS. [[sorry for the screaming) Ask the folks at Hostess. Or countless steel or airline employees. I don't know if the unions don't trust anyone else, or if they don't know any better. But simply holding out for a better deal could leave them as the last holdout, and that person will be given the deal to which the rest of the parties have agreed.

I don't know how many US Steels, Northwest Airlines, Delphi, Hostess, etc. we need to see before unions realize that things are not the way they used to be.

Union leadership needs to stop saying "Where the money comes from is not our problem". Certainly they shouldn't take the majority of the blame, let alone the whole blame. But you do have to wonder...when the Firefighters Union was fighting tooth and nail to remove the residency requirement, who did they think was going to replace the lost revenue that would be used to pay their pensions?

And unions aren't the only example:

- People need to learn that breaking into someone else's house is not just a crime, but that it will likely get you killed.

- You can't operate a motor vehicle on Belle Isle when you've had your driver's license suspended 18 times.

- A white mayoral candidate, born to a Republican judge and residing in the suburbs can get an endorsement from a Black Panther and annihilate the competition in a write-in campaign in Detroit.


Things are not going back to the way they used to be. I wonder how long it's going to take for people to realize it?

[Honky Tonk]

[QUOTE=corktownyuppie;430521]I don't know how many US Steels, Northwest Airlines, Delphi, Hostess, etc. we need to see before unions realize that things are not the way they used to be.

Union leadership needs to stop saying "Where the money comes from is not our problem". Certainly they shouldn't take the majority of the blame, let alone the whole blame. But you do have to wonder...when the Firefighters Union was fighting tooth and nail to remove the residency requirement, who did they think was going to replace the lost revenue that would be used to pay their pensions?

And unions aren't the only example:

- People need to learn that breaking into someone else's house is not just a crime, but that it will likely get you killed.

- You can't operate a motor vehicle on Belle Isle when you've had your driver's license suspended 18 times.

- A white mayoral candidate, born to a Republican judge and residing in the suburbs can get an endorsement from a Black Panther and annihilate the competition in a write-in campaign in Detroit.


Things are not going back to the way they used to be. I wonder how long it's going to take for people to realize it?[/QUOTE]

In this town? Decades.....

[Packman41]

To BK Guy:
As usual, your posts are the most intelligent, fact-filled statements to be read on this topic. You dispel the urban myths and give us the unvarnished truth. And your predictions come true.

I believe your statement that the pensioners have been poorly represented. I agree with you - plus they have been poorly represented for years. We have been reading the exposes' in the FREEP and News for years now.


My fear is that since the pension trustees are in a CYA mode that they will not adequately explain the total situation correctly to the pensioners that will be voting soon. How likely is it that Judge Rhodes will become involved in the explanation process so as to get the pensioners fully informed?

[BankruptcyGuy]

How likely is it that Judge Rhodes will become involved in the explanation process so as to get the pensioners fully informed?

Two answers:

1. Judge Rhodes will be VERY involved with making sure the disclosure statement is accurate and readable, considering the education and experience of the creditor in question. There is a high likelihood that if the statement isn't clear, he'll make them re-submit and start over.

2. The part that's difficult is converting a reduced payment to a particular fund into a reduction in benefit for a particular employee. I'm not sure what role the City has in that, historically, or whether the responsibility falls to the funds themselves.

Question to the pensioners out there: have you received a ballot? Is it clear to you what you're being asked to approve?

[[The unspoken question is, of course, are the pensioners being told that if they don't approve this deal, the outcome will be much, much worse?)

[Smirnoff]

It's not only the pension, the so called "deal" also includes the total elimination of health benefits [[medical, dental, vision) & life insurance which many cannot afford to pay, especially those injured [[shot, etc) on the job.

[Honky Tonk]

It's not only the pension, the so called "deal" also includes the total elimination of health benefits [[medical, dental, vision) & life insurance which many cannot afford to pay, especially those injured [[shot, etc) on the job.

Health Care "benefits" are being whittled down for every owner/employee situation, except for government elected officials. 50 years ago, you were covered 100%, then came the "small deductible", then that grew into "co-pay", now I'm paying 50% of my medical coverage. Next likely step will be 75%. Everyone's taking a hit these days.

[Wesley Mouch]

Health Care "benefits" are being whittled down for every owner/employee situation, except for government elected officials. 50 years ago, you were covered 100%, then came the "small deductible", then that grew into "co-pay", now I'm paying 50% of my medical coverage. Next likely step will be 75%. Everyone's taking a hit these days.

I am not well-informed here, but why is retiree healthcare coverage a big concern. We have Medicare. We have Obamacare. Combined, don't we socially provide decent coverage? I thought that was the idea. What's the real story?