Pensions could&#x27;ve been higher if they didn&#x27;t take that much out? Not sure how OP meant it but that&#x27;s what I feel; same when CEO&#x27;s take obscene salaries; the employees could&#x27;ve been paid better if she&#x2F;he didn&#x27;t take that kind of money. It seems obscene anyway; I can see you want to secure your future by taking enough millions (depends on where you live how many) to do that even though you make enough per month to live comfortably. I cannot see, unless (like Griffin does by the way) you have a higher plan, how taking more is better than flowing it back to employees or the actual purpose of your company (which in this case is pensions)?