Washington, Mar 20, 2002 - Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), a member of the Education and Workforce Subcommittee on Workforce Protection introduced an amendment to the Pension Security Act today which would prohibit funded deferred compensation plans for employers that maintained defined contribution plans that contribute company stock.

"As the nation has watched enormous corporate bankruptcies unfold at Enron and Global Crossing, and Chapter 11 proceedings at LTV Steel, we heard one common theme," Congressman Kucinich said. "There are two sets of rules for pension plans. Executives abide by one set of rules, and employees must play under a different set of rules. If executives faced the same risks as employees in their pension plans, they would have a vested interest in ensuring that plans are not emptied during a bankruptcy."

Kucinich cited the advantages of executive pension plans that have enabled executives to avoid serious financial disaster when their company files bankruptcy. Executives have more investment choices. Executive benefits in deferred compensation plans aren't required to be disclosed, and have greater legal protection during a bankruptcy. "Unbelievably," Kucinich said, "executives have entirely different pension plans with guaranteed rates of return."

By comparison, Kucinich said employees have more barriers to information and fewer options. They are prohibited from selling stock during lock-down periods; their severance pay is capped at $4650. Employees' pension plans aren't as protected as executive plans and employee 401(k)s don't come with guaranteed returns.

"The lack of a consistent set of rules between employees and executives is unjust, unfair, and should be illegal," Kucinich said. "The only provision which addresses employee/executive parity in the Administration's pension proposal forbids executives to sell during a lock down if employees cannot sell. This token provision doesn't even begin to establish fairness between employees and executives, and makes a mockery of the concept of parity. If the Administration were serious about its claim, "what's good for the captain is good for the crew," it would propose real measures to ensure employee/executive parity."