Corporate Secretary Wed, Nov 14, 2001 -
[ 1-18-02 removed my regular email address ]
The Boeing Company
Mail Code 5003-1001
100 N. Riverside
Chicago, IL 60606-1596 FAX 312-544-2829
Re: Shareholder Proposal for 2002 Annual Meeting
Enclosed is our Shareholder Proposal for the 2002 annual meeting.
We have submitted this by FAX and e-mail to reduce mail problems. Please verify receipt by returning the cover page by FAX to xxxxx or by e-mail to xxxxxxx
The purpose of our proposal is again to request the company to give all non- represented employees a choice between Heritage Pension Plans or the cash-balance style Pension Value Plan. As you are aware, the cash-balance plans have been the subject of several court cases, many of which have gone against the employer regarding reduced accrual rates.
Our qualifying shares consist of 60 shares acquired in 1979 and held in our name. We intend to hold these same 60 shares through the date of the 2002 Annual meeting. The share price of BA stock has been above $34 within the last 60 days and in conformance with past practice defined in SEC Release No. 20,091, these shares qualify. We also hold additional qualifying shares in street name totaling less than 1% of shares outstanding, and will disclose those on request.
We would also appreciate a copy of the transcript from the 2001 Annual meeting, and any special state attendance or qualification requirements resulting from your move of headquarters to Chicago.
Should there be any questions, please contact me at xxxx , or via e-mail at xxxxxxx
Thank you for your attention.
[signed ] xxxxxxxxx
Submitted Proposal [ 486 words ]- NOTE - ITALICS ADDED TO WORDS AND PHRASES DELETED/MODIFIED RE SEC LETTER OF FEB 14TH.
Resolved: Shareholders request the Board of Directors adopt the
following policy:
(1) All employees vested at time of conversion be given a choice between their heritage plans or the Pension Value cash-balance plan at time of termination or retirement.
(2) The cash balance plan to provide a monthly annuity at least equal to that expected under the old pension plan, or an actuarially equivalent lump sum.
Supporting Statements
Boeing implemented the Pension Value Plan [PVP] in 1999 for over 100,000 non-represented employees Although the PVP is primarily one of benefit formula change, Boeing improperly claimed it could not comply with eligibility, vesting, benefit and funding requirements by giving employees a choice at retirement or termination. Over 50 Congresspersons signed a letter to the IRS suggesting several changes in regulations including " . . . a safe harbor should be established allowing cash balance plans to meet existing legal requirements only if all employees are allowed to choose which pension plan works best for them . . ."
[Representative B. Sanders, February 24,2000]
Last year, this proposal received 52 million votes despite being incorrectly described on the proxy card as a retiree choice. The California Public Employees Retirement System supported it and stated 'CalPERS advocates non-discrimination in retirement " We believe a majority of employee shareholders supported our proposal. Boeing ignored and declined multiple requests for the summary voting record of State Street which held 69 million employee shares as a trustee.
We
believe Boeing has periodically understated the vested benefits
due employees during the last decade, which could make the new
plan appear better as the rate at which employees earn future
benefits can be more or less than the rate under the old plan(s). Boeing will not provide a copy of their analysis
described last year.
Boeing does not use excess plan investment gains to increase the
benefits otherwise due any participant, but uses them to reduce
or eliminate future Company contributions, and to pump up earnings
with non-spendable dollars. Last year, the amount used was
428 Million, about 20 percent of net earnings.
In 1994, over 1,000 McDonnell Douglas Corp. workers alleged that the company closed their plant in Tulsa to avoid paying pension and retiree medical benefits. On September 5 2001, Judge Holmes found for the retirees, while noting the company had "engaged in a course of obstruction, inconsistent representations and outright falsehoods." From paragraph 232 "The record further reflects a corporate culture of mendacity . . . and the disregard for the truth evidenced by the testimony of [ the then ] CEO.
[James R Milsap, et.al v McDonnell
Douglas Corp. Case No 94-C-633-H , and
the WSJ September 6 2001]
Communications and background on this and my previous proposal
are available at
http://home.att.net/~dprops/welcome.html
Please encourage the BOD to keep their
previous pension promises by giving an informed choice to loyal
employees who made the company
famous and profitable.
THANK YOU