Fully or Fooly Funded New (old CS) Plan?

Discussion in 'UPS Retirement Topics' started by crystal_ball, Oct 2, 2007.

  1. crystal_ball

    crystal_ball New Member

    "The agreement allows UPS to withdraw from the Central States Pension Fund and creates a jointly-administered pension fund for affected members. UPS will make a pre-tax $6.1 billion payment to the Central States Plan and will also fully fund the new Plan." from teamsters.org

    Does this mean that its fully funded to get back in line to where it was before CS started to tear it down?

    Does everyone in the country get to vote on this plan or only members in the CS area?

    Remember last contract there were approx. 65% PT to 35% FT total US workforce in the company. The part timers have a full and equal vote.
     
  2. homer123

    homer123 New Member

    I'm a retiree as of June 2006. 29years at age 57. I was a steward for about half that time. Prior to 10-01 I'm wondering if anyone ever heard mention of the $6+ billion buy-out by UPS as a pre-tax amount. What is this tax? That leaves CSPF w/ $3.9 billion to "shore-up" the underfunded plan. To me, it seems as though UPS will basically be getting an interest free loan of YOUR money to begin a systematic dismantling of the union. The CSPF is the weakest, and therefore, the most logical to begin with. Others will surely follow. Without the income from UPS can the CS maintain its obligations? I was one of many that took a hit after the restructure in 2004. Will they feel the need to restructure again to maintain? I can only speak for myself, but I now feel as thought I'm in a boat without a rudder. Thanks for letting me vent!
     
  3. trickpony1

    trickpony1 Well-Known Member

    The company is well aware of this fact and will use the disparity to "railroad" the contract through.
    Pump the PT'ers full of pizza and soda pop, give them a $500 bonus (beer money) and the contract will pass. The PT'ers could care less if the language screws the FT'ers further down the road because they will be too busy at the bar "setting them up" all the while knowing they won't be around for 25+ years.
    I've been in favor of a seperate contract for PT'ers but we all know that's not gonna happen.
     
  4. satellitedriver

    satellitedriver Moderator Staff Member

    I do not think CS will have to pay the tax on the 6.1 billion. It will be treated the same as UPS's weekly contribution to the fund, tax exempt.
    We pay income tax on it when we receive it.
    The ability of CS to meet their future obligations will depend on how they manage and invest the monies.
    The govt. will restructure the fund Jan. 1st 2008, if it is not funded.
    And, I am sure you do not want to take that hit.
    PAX
     
  5. homer123

    homer123 New Member

    I certainly hope you're correct, but this pretax/post-tax language has shown up in different publications reviewing the agreement. Also the $3.9 billion figure was, I believe, from the Bloomberg review.
     
  6. homer123

    homer123 New Member

    Added information regarding the $3.9 billion figure. Go to makeupsdeliver.org the 3rd story is on the agreement with a link to Bloomberg.com talking about the after tax amount. I'm trying to find out if this is taxable because it is not yet earned income but a buy-out, and therefore may be considered a gift, or something similar. (going directly to Bloomberg.com will not work because this article ran yesterday) Also, this article says the debt to CSPF by UPS may affect UPS's AAA stock rating. Wonder if they saw that coming? Thanks again.
     
  7. dunderchief

    dunderchief New Member

    I'm sure the company also is well aware that many part time employees don't vote on contracts.

    I've never been given pizza or soda pop.

    I came on in 1989 and missed the $500 bonus ($1000 for full time) but I'm pretty sure full timers voted on that contract as well.

    Many part time employees do care about full time issues because they want to be full time someday. Those that do care are more likely to take the time to vote on the contract because it might impact them greatly. Those that are just working for "beer money" aren't likely to vote. I don't see a whole lot of people on my preload shift getting up at 2:30 am for "beer money."

    I'm sure the company would love a "divide and conquer" strategy like your seperate PT contract idea. That would do more in a day to destroy Union solidarity than a year of pizzas and soda pops (which I'm still waiting for btw).
     
  8. GuyinBrown

    GuyinBrown Blah

    You guys are under the misguided impression that it is UPS's responsibility to completely fund CS. There are still other contributing employers that have an obligation to help get it to where it needs to be.
     
  9. satellitedriver

    satellitedriver Moderator Staff Member

    You are correct that other employers still have an obligation.
    Ups's 6.1 billion will bring the fund up to 70% funded, from where it is now at 47% funded.
    The contribution will keep it well above the number needed to keep the govt. from getting involved in 2008.
     
  10. homer123

    homer123 New Member

    I very much agree that there are others in the multi-employer pension fund that need to help. UPS has just shown them an avenue out. The $6.1B was based on UPS being the largest contributor. A long-time complaint by UPS (understandably) was it felt it was funding pensions of non-UPS retirees. That was the basis of the 1997 strike. Their song was "UPS dollars for UPS people." IBT's response was to strike. I recall signs on picket lines reading "United Pension Stealers." That was an attempt to move everyone into company plans at once. Now it will be divide & conquer by doing one at a time. In 1977 my local was in the Western States PF. Through some questionable maneuvering we ended up in CSPF. Some recall a "vote" but also recall strong endorsements from IBT. I was new & had no idea of what was transpiring. 20/20 hindsight.
     
  11. scratch

    scratch Least Best Moderator Staff Member

    I believe that ABF and Yellow Freight are going to try to get out of Central States as well. They don't have the cash on hand, but will borrow the money and the loan will take them twenty years to pay off.
     
  12. droopy62

    droopy62 Guest

    It is my understanding that ABF pulled out of the TMI. They still remain in Central States for now. Yellow on the other hand, Owns Yellow , Roadway,USF Holland. Bestway, New Penn . So now there is only one contributor to the fund for all those teamsters. It was a multi-employer contributing fund that kept every one straight.
    I think the first five years of this new venture will be wonderful, after that we will be at UPS's mercy. They will have us right where they want us. I believe that if we vote this contract in, we will be cutting our own throats.
     
  13. GuyinBrown

    GuyinBrown Blah

    The "UPS is trying to steal our pension" arguments are really weak. If they take anything, then it's with the IBT's blessing. The proposal is for it to be jointly administered. Try a new scare tactic.
     
  14. homer123

    homer123 New Member

    I agree with the lack of involvement by part-timers. What do they have to gain? And as pointed out, many do not stick around. You should know, however, that the part-timers in Western States covered centers are in the Western States PF(possibly other conferences, as well). That is probably a large part of the reason WSPF is fully funded. When a part-timer moves on his/her contributions remain in the WSPF. The fact that part-timers in CS are in a UPS plan is like a cash cow for the company. This has been repeatedly pointed out in negotiations but UPS won't budge. If they won't budge on this point, why would they do anything beneficial to anyone but UPS. This CS buy-out seems like a quick (and probably short lived) fix for CSPF:crying:, but a pot of gold for the company. Is the writing on the wall?
     
  15. crystal_ball

    crystal_ball New Member

    Does this mean that its fully funded to get back in line to where it was before CS started to tear it down?

    Does everyone in the country get to vote on this plan or only members in the CS area?
     
  16. 705red

    705red Browncafe Steward

    Guy i dont believe anyone is trying to use scare tactics. Everyone needs to realize that ups looks well down the road with every decision they make. Ups saves money by buying out of cs and still leacing all those involved in that plan. Ups has not shown that they can run their sep plans any better than the mep. So why should someone be interested in buying into the ups for upsers bs that the company is selling. Just read this article on one of ups's sep plan, by the way this is a ups teamster pension, who can ups blame for no 25and out?
    http://makeupsdeliver.org/news.php?extend.84
     
  17. GuyinBrown

    GuyinBrown Blah

    The IBT should be able to look down the road just like UPS. Unless you're saying we have inept leadership, that point is irrelevant. I didn't read anywhere in there that said 804's plan was a SEP. Regardless, I for one, would be willing to give up .10 an hour to secure my pension. Especially a 25 and out. Under the current CS rules we have no 25 and out and even after 30 years I still lose 1/3 of my pension due to penalties for retiring under age 62. I'm sorry, but you'll have as hard a time convincing me that this is a bad deal as I'm having convincing you that getting us out of CS is a good thing for every employee - even those not covered by CS.
     
  18. 705red

    705red Browncafe Steward

    Hey i would be all for taking my yearly raises and investing it into my retirement right now. I also agree that you in cs are getting the shaft, and i do really wish you all the best, but at what cost? I honestly believe that you (csers) would vote to get out of cs at any cost, like most of the details we have heard and seen about this current offer from ups. You csers have a difficult decision to make. You should be allowed to vote on the contract and a seperate vote for the contract, but this is were i believe both sides are trying to push this contract through ny interlocking them both. Good luck with your choices.