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 Retirement Topics
Has IBT/CS been a wise steward of our pension?
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="wkmac" data-source="post: 53009"><p>OK2BC, </p><p>Good point and question as I am starting to understand that what you describe is the way it is. In my email contact with APWA Mr. Silkman talked about the numerous rumors over the internet and his concern for them as they pertain to the APWA effort. Sawman and any of the rest of us, I know we aren't happy with what we have and it's human nature to latch on to anything that makes it simple to understand and explain but we've got to start throwing out hard facts no matter how it makes the issue look. Until we do that we can and will be manipulated by anyone that is willing to throw out a chewy carrot and at the end of the day the only thing we'll have is a severe case of the gut ache! </p><p> </p><p>In all this talk on the pension I wonder if the real enemy may not be the healthcare costs themselves. I haven't seen the article but I heard George Will wrote an interesting piece earlier this week on the retirement system at General Motors and the fact it is such a drain on their bottomline and if I heard correct it wasn't so much the monthly pension check but it was the health cost of the retirees. Back in the mid 90's when the idea of some form of nationalized healthcare was being discussed it was said at the time that privately GM and many other large companies were thinking seriously of getting on board because if the gov't via the taxpayer took this over then the massive amount of money freed up to the bottomline would make their earnings skyrocket. Maybe they saw what is happening now ahead of time and like any good businessman wanted to limit their exposure and expenses. </p><p> </p><p>We can discuss retirement monthly checks all day long but I'm beginning to believe we also need to take a very hard look at healthcare costs. As a point to this CS took the retirement age without having to come out of pocket in a big way for health coverage up to 62 from 55. If I'm correct 62 is the earliest you can qualify for medicare which when this happens the medicare becomes the primary. A connection maybe? And if so maybe this is a clue to us as to where to look for the real source of what is effecting us the most. I say that because getting back to OK's original point that the exact funds needed to fund the retirement for each of us is placed into an account, in some of our cases with CS and if this is true, then specifically on retirement we should be AOK. However if the medical part vastly exceeds inflation of the growth rate factored by the plan then we may see exactly what we are seeing. Are we focused in the wrong area? I'm just asking. Thoughts! Comments! Ideas!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="wkmac, post: 53009"] OK2BC, Good point and question as I am starting to understand that what you describe is the way it is. In my email contact with APWA Mr. Silkman talked about the numerous rumors over the internet and his concern for them as they pertain to the APWA effort. Sawman and any of the rest of us, I know we aren't happy with what we have and it's human nature to latch on to anything that makes it simple to understand and explain but we've got to start throwing out hard facts no matter how it makes the issue look. Until we do that we can and will be manipulated by anyone that is willing to throw out a chewy carrot and at the end of the day the only thing we'll have is a severe case of the gut ache! In all this talk on the pension I wonder if the real enemy may not be the healthcare costs themselves. I haven't seen the article but I heard George Will wrote an interesting piece earlier this week on the retirement system at General Motors and the fact it is such a drain on their bottomline and if I heard correct it wasn't so much the monthly pension check but it was the health cost of the retirees. Back in the mid 90's when the idea of some form of nationalized healthcare was being discussed it was said at the time that privately GM and many other large companies were thinking seriously of getting on board because if the gov't via the taxpayer took this over then the massive amount of money freed up to the bottomline would make their earnings skyrocket. Maybe they saw what is happening now ahead of time and like any good businessman wanted to limit their exposure and expenses. We can discuss retirement monthly checks all day long but I'm beginning to believe we also need to take a very hard look at healthcare costs. As a point to this CS took the retirement age without having to come out of pocket in a big way for health coverage up to 62 from 55. If I'm correct 62 is the earliest you can qualify for medicare which when this happens the medicare becomes the primary. A connection maybe? And if so maybe this is a clue to us as to where to look for the real source of what is effecting us the most. I say that because getting back to OK's original point that the exact funds needed to fund the retirement for each of us is placed into an account, in some of our cases with CS and if this is true, then specifically on retirement we should be AOK. However if the medical part vastly exceeds inflation of the growth rate factored by the plan then we may see exactly what we are seeing. Are we focused in the wrong area? I'm just asking. Thoughts! Comments! Ideas! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Retirement Topics
Has IBT/CS been a wise steward of our pension?
Top