July 6, 2005

Dear Fellow URPBPA Member,

Questions have been raised over the past several months about the
possibility of URPBPA suing various parties over some of their
agreements that have the potential for affecting retired pilots'
pensions.  The recent lawsuit by a group of US Airways pilots has
increased the number of questions.

As has been previously stated, URPBPA has evaluated many different
approaches for protecting our pension benefits.  We have focused on
attacking the decisions that could lead to the termination of our
pension plan by the Bankruptcy Court, as our legal and other advisors
feel this provides the best potential for success.  There are other
avenues that we may pursue later, if necessary, but the URPBPA Board
feels strongly that our current efforts provide the highest probability
of success and the best use of our funds.

The major reason we have ruled out litigation against various parties at
this time is that the courts will not allow cases for monetary damages
to proceed when the loss is only prospective. We are still receiving our
full pensions every month and are not yet in a position to claim
monetary damages resulting from agreements between other parties in the
United bankruptcy.  True, some of the agreements hold the potential for
financial harm to pilot retirees, but as of today, we have not suffered
any financial loss as the result of these agreements.  This could change
in the future if we suffer a reduction in pension payments, and we will,
of course, evaluate our options at that time.

There are significant differences between our situation and the
circumstances surrounding the US Airways lawsuit.  The most significant
is that the US Airways case was brought on behalf of active pilots or
pilots who were active at the time their pension plan was changed,
during the US Airways bankruptcy, from a defined benefit plan to a
defined contribution plan.  They have sued US Airways, ALPA and the
Retirement Systems of Alabama under various statutes.  Their action
against ALPA includes the claim that older active pilots were
disadvantaged by ALPA's alleged preference of younger active pilots and
that ALPA allegedly agreed to the termination of the defined benefit
plan without the required membership ratification.

The Railway Labor Act does not require unions in the airline and
railroad industry to represent retired workers.  ALPA has taken the
position that it does not represent retired pilots.  URPBPA only
represents retired pilots and we have challenged ALPA's agreement with
United regarding the pilots' pension plan.  The dispute is ongoing and
will soon be before the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals which is the
federal appeals court in Chicago.

At the same time, URPBPA is continuing to protect our pensions by
resisting the PBGC's lawsuit to take over the pilot pension plan.  The
pilot pension plan, unlike United's other pension plans, is still intact
and paying 100% of qualified and non-qualified benefits to retired
pilots.  The continuation of the pilot plan is not because of United's
generosity, but is due in large part to the vigorous actions of URPBPA
against United and the PBGC.

URPBPA is committed to a vigorous legal fight to protect our pensions. 
Should the circumstances change, we will adapt our efforts to continue
to wage the most effective fight possible.

Fraternally,

Roger Hall
President
United Retired Pilots Benefit Protection Association