Management Retirement Denied

SafetyFirst

Well-Known Member
Wow, that's a really :censored2:ty way of doing business. You can say they met their contractual obligations all you want ... but people are more than numbers. UPS rakes in billions annually, that earned sum of money means so much more to the family than the company and I guarantee 95% of people who hear about this will view it as a totally immoral action by UPS.
 

beentheredonethat

Well-Known Member
...which is why I will have all my ducks in a row long before my last day...

The article didn't say but I'm surprised his spouse was not part of the decision making process.
I actually knew this person. He was a nice guy. He wasn't married and he had four adult kids. With UPS management, there are basically 4 types of pension options. Option 1, is you get 100% of what you should get at retirement (based on age, years of work, average salary etc). Option 2 is you get less then 100% of what you earned, but in event of your death, your spouse get 50% of that amount until she dies. Option 3, is you get even less then option 2, but in event of your death, your spouse continues to receive the same amount until their death. Option 4 is you get less then 100%, but in event of your death, your estate\beneficiaries keep getting your pension check for a total of 10 years (from the date of retirement). There may be another option of between 50/100% for spouse. In any event, if a mgmt person has a spouse they default to the option 2 and you can change it. If a person is not married, option 1 is the default. He chose option 4 but since he didn't retire yet, the default option kicked in, which for him being single was option 1 and nothing went to beneficiary. I told my wife, if I am dying and am still working and 55 or above, keep me alive until I can "officially retire" then make sure we choose the 100% option (Option 3) so she has the most money possible. (Then pull the plug on me). I agree what UPS did was awful. What is unknown is what did HR say and what did they know at time.
 

Catatonic

Nine Lives
Wow, that's a really :censored2:ty way of doing business. You can say they met their contractual obligations all you want ... but people are more than numbers. UPS rakes in billions annually, that earned sum of money means so much more to the family than the company and I guarantee 95% of people who hear about this will view it as a totally immoral action by UPS.
A public corporation Board has responsibilities to maximize profit and never set a precedent that may incur future debt or uncertainty.
That's the law of the US Government.

But it does suck.
 

beentheredonethat

Well-Known Member
A public corporation Board has responsibilities to maximize profit and never set a precedent that may incur future debt or uncertainty.
That's the law of the US Government.

But it does suck.
I agree with you in theory. However, in this particular case, everyone. And I mean everyone in district knew he was on deaths door. He had lost 50+ pounds. He was "dead man walking". For HR to "advise" him to wait to get more vacation pay at full rate was negligent. To give advice of only the pro without the cons is wrong. Granted, the courts decided there was no proof of this also burden was on him to read the paperwork. Overall :censored2:ty situation for his kids. Fortunately they weren't depending on it since they were adults. They also got to split his 100K or so of UPS insurance for dying while employed. Not sure if he had any
 

Covemastah

Hoopah drives the boat Chief !!
Do you remember driving by the Rustic Drive In just outside of Woondicket? We used to pile in to the station wagon (yes, the one with the third seat) and watch a double feature. Sadly, they switched over to porn before closing.
Don't remember ,, it was about 5 yrs ago at two in the morn. lol
 
Top