Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Discussions
Divorce/Pension Question
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="hypocrisy" data-source="post: 845680" data-attributes="member: 9500"><p>Upstate is not in the Western Conference of Teamster pension plan, nor in AZ, so his information is not particularly relevant.</p><p></p><p>Yes, she is entitled to 50% of the pension for the years worked during which they were married. I'm assuming he is a bargaining unit employee and not management. If so, he is automatically having contributions made to the Western Conference of Teamsters Pension Fund. Arizona, like California and many other States, is a 'Community Property' state. It is not paid in a lump sum but as a portion of benefits <em>after your son retires</em> (so, the longer he delays retirement the longer it takes for her to get her money. The amount will never change, a calculation called a "quadro" is performed to calculate what the amount will be and the check is disbursed without him ever seeing where it goes. Often, this can be offset by any retirement/pension/401k/IRA accounts she has in her name, or used as a bargaining chip to encourage a lump sum payment now. Personally, I would pay out a disproportionate amount from his 401k, if he has one, or quit claim the marital home rather than paying it from the pension. If, for example, your son retires at age 50 and lives to be 85, if she received $1000/mo in pension payments that would be $420,000. The longer he delays retirement, the less she will receive overall. The WCT is the largest and most profitable pension plan in the Country so it represents quite a tempting cherry for his ex. With 16 years in, the $1000/mo is probably a conservative estimate should he make it to his PEER age.)</p><p></p><p>If he is in Management, he will also have a pension plan but I am not familiar with the details. </p><p></p><p>It's important to note that she is also responsible for half the marital debt.</p><p></p><p>She would also be entitled to 50% of the 401k contributions and earnings during the marriage as well as half of any marital assets such as a house, investment property, etc. </p><p></p><p>Luckily you are in Arizona and not California, as she would be entitled to lifetime alimony after 10 years of marriage (assuming he is the larger wage earner). </p><p></p><p>If is a Teamster, he is entitled to use the legal benefit <em>as is his wife</em>. He should immediately schedule a consultation to prevent her from exercising this option. However, I would not use the Teamster contracted attorney if the divorce is not a simple one, rather, use the Teamster attorney for the initial filing and consent decree, then find a better attorney (expect to pay $5000-$10,000) for the remainder. This is not because the Teamster contracted attorneys are substandard, it's because for what they are paid they are not particularly aggressive. Any issues with kids, property or investments, tax issues, or other kinks should definitely seek aggressive counsel.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="hypocrisy, post: 845680, member: 9500"] Upstate is not in the Western Conference of Teamster pension plan, nor in AZ, so his information is not particularly relevant. Yes, she is entitled to 50% of the pension for the years worked during which they were married. I'm assuming he is a bargaining unit employee and not management. If so, he is automatically having contributions made to the Western Conference of Teamsters Pension Fund. Arizona, like California and many other States, is a 'Community Property' state. It is not paid in a lump sum but as a portion of benefits [I]after your son retires[/I] (so, the longer he delays retirement the longer it takes for her to get her money. The amount will never change, a calculation called a "quadro" is performed to calculate what the amount will be and the check is disbursed without him ever seeing where it goes. Often, this can be offset by any retirement/pension/401k/IRA accounts she has in her name, or used as a bargaining chip to encourage a lump sum payment now. Personally, I would pay out a disproportionate amount from his 401k, if he has one, or quit claim the marital home rather than paying it from the pension. If, for example, your son retires at age 50 and lives to be 85, if she received $1000/mo in pension payments that would be $420,000. The longer he delays retirement, the less she will receive overall. The WCT is the largest and most profitable pension plan in the Country so it represents quite a tempting cherry for his ex. With 16 years in, the $1000/mo is probably a conservative estimate should he make it to his PEER age.) If he is in Management, he will also have a pension plan but I am not familiar with the details. It's important to note that she is also responsible for half the marital debt. She would also be entitled to 50% of the 401k contributions and earnings during the marriage as well as half of any marital assets such as a house, investment property, etc. Luckily you are in Arizona and not California, as she would be entitled to lifetime alimony after 10 years of marriage (assuming he is the larger wage earner). If is a Teamster, he is entitled to use the legal benefit [I]as is his wife[/I]. He should immediately schedule a consultation to prevent her from exercising this option. However, I would not use the Teamster contracted attorney if the divorce is not a simple one, rather, use the Teamster attorney for the initial filing and consent decree, then find a better attorney (expect to pay $5000-$10,000) for the remainder. This is not because the Teamster contracted attorneys are substandard, it's because for what they are paid they are not particularly aggressive. Any issues with kids, property or investments, tax issues, or other kinks should definitely seek aggressive counsel. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Discussions
Divorce/Pension Question
Top