Delta Screws Its Employees... Again

Bankruptcy Judge Approves Delta Termination of Pilot Pension Plan

Like so many other big industry conglomerates, Delta has overspent, under-produced and ripped off the public with high airfares for years, promising Delta employees a future while surreptitiously screwing its workforce in the process. I say that instead of trying to keep Delta in the wings, the judge should have called for a liquidation of all Delta assets and all debts foregone in favor of the employees and their pension plan. Instead, Delta will wipe clean its debt to its stockholders (many of whom are employees) and its dedicated employees that have worked diligently to keep Delta in the skies... and the worker gets screwed in the process.

US Bankruptcy Judge Adlai Hardin Tuesday approved a request by Delta Airlines to end its pension plan for pilots. Delta reached a settlement with a group of retired pilots on Monday, agreeing to pay $500,000 for fees and expenses if the group ceased its opposition to Delta's proposal to terminate the plan. In order to officially end the pension plan, Delta must still report to the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp.

Delta filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection last year. The company filed to drop the pension plan in August, saying it had insufficient funds to cover it. The plan had offered pilots who retired half of their pension benefits in a lump sum.

But what really bothers me is that the top executives and board members will not have to relinquish previously earned compensation and benefits--including retirement benefits--in order to keep the company afloat. Since they were the people responsible for running the company into the ground, shouldn't they be the ones forced to pay up and suffer the consequences?

Then, too, a major problem in corporate America is that there is no real accounting or accountability on how money is spent, assets are managed and companies are governed. Hell, most companies do not even know how to keep their data secure, never mind being able to accurately account for it.

Perspective: Fiddling While Rome Burned

Despite all the attention lavished on data security, most U.S. corporations still do not think that they can prevent data breaches.

A just-released report provided first to this columnist, prepared by the Ponemon Institute, and sponsored by PortAuthority Technologies paints a bleak picture. The results of the report were compiled from a survey of 850 security practitioners and centered on how they deal with detection and prevention of data breaches within their U.S. companies.

While there is a heightened focus on data security, the new findings suggest that data security continues to present serious challenges to the business world. Even though a majority of the surveyed companies believe that they can detect data breaches, an even larger percentage--63 percent--acknowledge they can't do anything to prevent the attacks. Many say they are affected by high false-positive rates of up to 35 percent, an operational shortcoming that affects their ability to detect intrusions.
There is the minority...who think they lead a charmed existence and are invulnerable to data breaches. They either are naive or doing something very right.

Just as troubling is the fact that 41 percent of the surveyed companies do not believe that they are effective at enforcing their data security policies. The No. 1 reason cited for failed enforcement: lack of resources. This is unacceptable; data security is not the place to be penny-wise and pound-foolish. Wouldn't it be much better to plan and spend for prevention than to grapple with the burden and larger expense of a breach after the fact?

The report found that companies are likely to detect both large and small data breaches, but the detection rates still are too low. Better technological methods must be employed to ascertain breaches as soon as they happen, so they can be stopped and damage can be minimized.

Then, there is the minority--some 16 percent of the surveyed companies--who think they lead a charmed existence and are invulnerable to data breaches. They either are naive or doing something very right that others should study.

Among companies that choose not to use leak prevention technologies, cost is the big issue. About one-third say that such technologies simply are too expensive. You can see the looming contradiction. Effective data security may not be the primary mission at most companies, but it soars to the top of the corporate agenda when defenses fail.

The question is whether U.S. companies are ready to make the necessary commitment to fix the system. Failing that, are they at least ready to get ready?