I realized I made a mistake in this thread: I'm conflating TC and take-home, when my point really only applies to take-home. Sorry for that! You're right that

I realized I made a mistake in this thread: I'm conflating TC and take-home, when my point really only applies to take-home. Sorry for that! You're right that pension benefits can be reasonably included in a TC calculation; I'd still argue that the article's framing is meant to imply that TC here reflects a larger take-home than it actually does, as well as malfeasance on SF's part (rather than ordinary and boring funding obligations).