FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                                              CONTACT: Joshua Gillespie
March 31, 2010                                                                                           (317) 848-0201

Rep. Burton, Oversight Republicans Step up the Pressure in Their Fight for Equity for Delphi Retirees

INDIANAPOLIS, IN – Today Rep. Dan Burton (R-IN-05), along with other GOP members of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, stepped up their pressure on General Motors (“GM”) Chief Executive Officer Ed Whitacre Jr. to release all records and communications between General Motors, and the Federal Government regarding GM’s decision to discriminate against non-union workers while spending billions on union pensions.

“The Executives of General Motors with the tacit or explicit approval of the Obama Administration – the majority owner of General Motors – deliberately denied more than 21,000 salaried Delphi retirees nationwide the pension benefits they were promised.  As I have said repeatedly since we launched this investigation, in mid-2009, that the American people, especially the thousands of Hoosier families who have been impacted by this decision, and whose tax dollars are being used to pay the supplemental funds to the Delphi union workers, deserve a full and transparent explanation from all parties involved as to why their sacrifice was necessary while the pension benefits of Delphi’s 46,000 union workers were protected.

“For eight months GM and the Administration have stonewalled our requests for information on this subject as well as the subject of plant and dealership closures; and what information they have provided, has left us with far more questions than answers.  The American people invested $53 Billion in General Motors to keep the company afloat and they deserve to know if GM is making sound business decisions or decisions based on inappropriate political influence.  Today’s letter is a reminder to GM and the Administration that we are not going away and we are not going to rest until all of our questions are answered.”

The following is the letter sent by Rep. Burton and the Oversight Republicans:

March 31, 2010

Mr. Ed Whitacre Jr.
Chief Executive Officer
General Motors Corporation
300 Renaissance Center
Detroit, MI 48243

Dear Mr. Whitacre:

On July 22, 2009, Ranking Member Issa wrote to former General Motors Co. (“GM”) CEO Frederick Henderson expressing concern that GM may be making business decisions based on inappropriate political interference and requested responses to a number of questions and documents on plant and dealership closures.  While you answered some of his questions in your formal response, dated September 8, 2009, you failed to provide documents necessary to the Committee’s investigation. 

Following his last letter, a number of news reports have implied that the U.S. Department of the Treasury politicized the Delphi bankruptcy, securing supplemental payments for Delphi’s unionized employees while Delphi’s salaried employees were forced to accept payments set by the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation.  When questioned about its disparate treatment of Delphi employees and retirees, Tom Wilkinson, spokesman for GM, stated that it agreed to supplement Delphi union employees and retirees because it had promised to do so in 1999.  It did not supplement Delphi non-union employees and retirees because it “isn’t something that GM has any control over” and “GM doesn’t have the legal obligation nor does it have the money to re-fund those pensions.” 

As stated in Ranking Member Issa’s previous letter, the politicization of GM’s operations will almost certainly hurt the American taxpayers by reducing the likelihood that the company will ever become profitable and have any chance of repaying the taxpayers’ $51 billion bailout of GM.  The American people have a right to know that their money is being spent wisely and is not being used to satisfy the narrow interests of individual politicians or special interest groups.  Therefore, we write to reiterate and expand upon Ranking Member Issa’s request for information.  To assist the Committee with its investigation, please provide the following documents:

1.    All records and communications between GM and the President’s Automotive Task Force, the United Auto Workers, any Member of Congress or other public official, referring or relating to the closure of any GM facility, including but not limited to GM manufacturing plants, dealerships, and subsidiaries, between November 1, 2008 and March 31, 2010;

2.    All records and communications between GM and the President’s Automotive Task Force, the United Auto Workers, any Member of Congress or other public official, referring or relating to a decision to reopen a GM facility that had previously been closed or idled, including but not limited to GM manufacturing plants, dealerships, and subsidiaries, between November 1, 2008 and March 31, 2010;

3.    All records and communications between GM and the U.S. Department of the Treasury, the President’s Automotive Task Force, the United Auto Workers, the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, Delphi Corporation, Delphi Holding, any Member of Congress or other public official, referring or relating to retirement or pension benefits for GM or Delphi Corporation employees, between November 1, 2008 and March 31, 2010; and

4.    All current collective bargaining agreements covering GM employees and those in force in 1999.

We respectfully request that you provide the requested information no later than Wednesday, April 13, 2010.

See attached letter

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                                              CONTACT: John Donnelly
January 14, 2010                                                                                     (317) 848-0201

Burton, Oversight Republicans Continue To Demand Answers on GM-Delphi Union Pension Deal

Members want to know what role the Treasury Department’s Auto Task Force played in GM’s decision to discriminate against non-union workers while spending billions on union pensions 

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Rep. Dan Burton (R-IN-05) along with other House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Republicans today sent letters to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) Acting Director Vincent Snowbarger asking for all records and communications relating to General Motors Corporation’s decision to funnel funds to the pensions of 46,000 Delphi corporation union workers while denying over 21,000 Delphi non-union employees the same benefit.  

"As I said when I requested a Congressional hearing on this issue in October 2009, it seems fundamentally unfair that salaried and union employees from the same company, who are faced with the same unfortunate situation, are being treated so unequally by the Federal government,” said Rep. Dan Burton (R-IN).  “The American people, especially the thousands of Hoosier families who have been impacted by this, and whose tax dollars will be used to pay the supplemental funds to the Delphi union workers, deserve a full and transparent explanation from all parties involved."

“The Obama Administration denied more than 21,000 salaried Delphi retirees nationwide the pension benefits they were promised,” said Rep. Michael Turner (R-OH).  “Many of these former employees, including over 1,000 in the Dayton region, made their careers by supporting the automotive parts manufacturer.  Delphi’s former workers – union and non-union – should not be treated differently in their retirement years. The Administration owes these men and women a detailed explanation.”

The letters to Geithner and Snowbarger are a follow up to an unanswered November 12, 2009 letter from Ranking Member Issa to Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Ed Towns (D-NY) and Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) demanding hearings on the GM Delphi pension deal for unionized employees.

On October 27, 2009, Rep. Dan Burton called on Chairman Towns and Ranking Member Issa to investigate and convene hearings on the GM-Delphi pension deal.

### 

MEDIA ADVISORY                                                                                             CONTACT: John Donnelly
October 27, 2009                                                                                                      (202) 225-2276

Burton Requests Hearing About Delphi Pension Disparity

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Today, Rep. Dan Burton (R-IN-05) formally requested that the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform convene hearings to investigate the Delphi retiree pensions controversy. While both salaried and hourly retirees are now under the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, the former parent of Delphi, General Motors, has decided to "top-up" the pensions of only hourly retirees to ensure they receive their promised benefits in full. Delphi's 21,000 salaried retirees will not be afforded that same benefit, and, according to a report in the New York Times yesterday, many will suffer a 30% to 70% pension cut as a result. Rep. Burton has requested that all parties involved in determining the present Delphi pension arrangements, including Obama Administration officials, be brought before the Oversight Committee for questioning.

The following is Rep. Burton's letter:

October 27, 2009
The Honorable Edolphus Towns
Chairman
House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
U.S. House of Representatives
2157 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515

The Honorable Darrell Issa
Ranking Republican Member
House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
U.S. House of Representatives
B350A Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member Issa:

I am writing to you to respectfully ask you to convene a Committee hearing to investigate the decision-making process conducted by General
Motors (GM), Delphi Corporation, the United States Department of the Treasury and the Presidential Automotive Task Force (PATF) regarding the apparently unequal treatment of Delphi Corporation's hourly versus salaried retirees.

As you may know, Delphi Corporation was spun off from GM in 1999, and the majority of Delphi retirees - hourly and salaried - spent their careers (on average over 25 years) working for GM until being involuntarily moved to Delphi. On October 6, 2009 - after almost four years in bankruptcy - Delphi became a private company following the acquisition of substantially all of its global core businesses by a group of private investors. The buyout was leveraged in part with Federal money channeled from GM. As part of the restructuring agreement worked out by the PATF and the U.S. Treasury Department, GM agreed, in  addition to supplying funds for the buyout, to reacquire five Delphi manufacturing plants and "top-up" the pension funds of Delphi's hourly pension plan beyond the amount of benefits expected to be paid to those employees from the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation (PBGC), which assumed control of Delphi's pension plans. Delphi's salaried pensioners were offered no supplemental payments. As a result Delphi's 21,000 salaried retirees nationwide are liable to see their pension payments drastically cut, if not eliminated entirely; whereas hourly retirees get everything they were promised.

It seems to me fundamentally unfair that two groups of retirees from the same company, who worked side-by-side for many years, and who are faced
with the same unfortunate situation, are being treated so radically differently by the Federal government. It also seems to be an odd financial decision for GM - itself only recently emerged from bankruptcy and dependent on $53 billion in assistance from the U.S. Treasury in order to stay in business - to essentially weaken its own pension fund to help the Delphi hourly workers.

I concede that there may some legitimate reasons, of which I am not aware, for the decision to treat these two groups of retirees differently. GM's stated reason, that it paid top-ups to the hourly (union) retirees because it had promised to do so in 1999, does not seem to hold up. Media reports indicate that initially, GM was going to pay supplements only to Delphi's retirees who belong to the U.A.W., because that was the only union representing the Delphi workers after the bankruptcy. But GM eventually agreed - after an alleged intervention by the Administration - to pay top-ups to retirees represented by the steelworkers' and electrical workers' unions after those two unions protested.

Based on reports I have seen, officials with the PBGC have acknowledged that there is no precedent for the Delphi situation. Therefore in the interests of transparency and accountability, I believe that the workers, retirees and the American people - who are now 60% owners of GM and whose tax dollars will essentially be used to pay these supplemental payments, as well as any funding needed to close the gap in the PBGC's funding because of this situation - deserve a full explanation of this decision from all parties involved. To that end, I respectfully ask the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform to, as quickly as practicable, convene a hearing so that Members of the Committee may question representatives of the PATF, GM, Delphi, Treasury and the PBGC regarding the disparity between Delphi Corporation's salaried and hourly pensions.

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Issa, Delphi's salaried retirees fully understand that the restructuring of America's automotive industry requires shared sacrifices and responsibilities. However, since the salaried retirees have been asked to bear extra burdens to accomplish that goal, they, along with their families, simply seek a full explanation for how this inequitable treatment has come to pass. I do not believe that that is an unreasonable request.

I thank you both for your personal time and attention to this matter.

Sincerely,
Dan Burton
Member of Congress

###

Good afternoon friends.

I believe that the American people deserve affordable, accessible, high-quality healthcare.
Many people fear, and I believe rightly, that a government-run health care system will take away their freedom of choice in medical care, force them to pay huge new "health-care" taxes, and eliminate medical and personal privacy. Americans do not want government attorneys and government bureaucrats controlling what treatments and tests their doctor will be allowed to give them. However, whether we extend health care coverage through private sector initiatives or through government programs we are simply delaying the inevitable unless we tackle the true problem that is the skyrocketing cost of health care in this country. I believe we can make a serious improvements in controlling health care costs if we focus on three initiatives; ending the medical liability crisis through reasonable limits on non-economic and punitive damages; reducing overhead through updated medical billing codes and greater use of digital health care records; and, lowering prescription drug costs through an international market regime (sometimes called reimportation) – with appropriate safeguards to ensure the pedigree of the drugs from manufacturer to consumer.

For more information about the issue of health care, please click here.

I am a supporter and co-sponsor of HR 82 the "Social Security Fairness Act of 2007."  HR 82 solves the problem of the Government Pension Offset provision that reduces earned benefits for more than 300,000 Americans – over 3,300 Hoosiers) each year, by upwards of $3,600. For many Americans affected by the GPO, especially those who rely on Social Security for the bulk of their retirement income, this means the difference between a comfortable retirement and poverty.  In 1977, Congress enacted the GPO provision– as part of the 1977 Social Security Act Amendments – and closed this supposed loophole by declaring government pensions equal to Social Security benefits. While the reforms that led to the creation of the Government Pension Offset were meant to prevent public employees from being unfairly enriched, the practical effect is that those providing critical public services are being unjustly penalized.

H.R. 82 solves this problem by repealing the GPO. I understand that repealing the Government Pension Offset will be costly. According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the Social Security actuaries, elimination of the GPO would cost $31.3 billion over 10 years, and in the long run would cost 0.06f taxable payroll; which would increase Social Security’s long-range deficit by about 3Modifying the GPO to eliminate the most detrimental affects of the provision may be a more fiscally viable approach to solving the problem but I am open to considering all options that move us toward the goal of removing this unfair penalty and allowing all Americans to keep the Social Security benefits to which they are entitled.