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
Pension Agency Faces a New Front
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: 54926"><p>isdrone, </p><p>I do agree that the pension situation does place UPS in harms way however a nuclear scenario would have to take place and the chances of that are minimal at best. At the same time I do believe we as UPSers covered by these multi pension plans should take note of this and keep this in mind and what it would do to us even on an individual level it this should occur. I believe the effect would not so much be to our retirement but it could very well effect our jobs depending on the severity. </p><p> </p><p>As for the 1997' offer, I just don't think any of us can really throw that around as set in stone. I do agree that the union matched the company offer to counter what the company did but let's look at it from several perspectives. </p><p> </p><p>Was it sincere or a ploy to scuttle the impending strike? This offer was literally a midnight offer in the sense it was at the last minute and there were way to many unanswered questions with the whole proposal. On it's face it looked good but it just had some blank spots that no one had answers for. UPS should have thrown this out weeks earlier but that was complicated by the fact that bothsides were in agreement no information or news from contract talks would be made public. I happen to be in absolute complete disagreement with this approach which both sides still maintain but they've agreed to it so there you go. It could probably be said bothsides live and die by that sword. </p><p> </p><p>Secondly, UPS knew the fragile state the various pensions were headed in and this is where it gets cloudy and will depend on your attitude toward the company. On the one hand you have the argument the company saw the trouble and wanted to watch out for and protect us and came up with this idea to do it. Then you have the position the company saw the huge liability they faced and what it would do to them and yes even us and wanted to get out. Thirdly, by controlling the entire pension fund they could limit the cost and drive up the bottomline and lastly they could muddy the water enough to fragment the strike and maybe kill it before it even began. </p><p> </p><p>Now the offer played well down here in the south because quite frankly we don't have a history of union involvment like other parts of the country so the loyality to a union isn't that great to begin with. We just want what we can get and it makes no difference to much from whom we get it. Couple that with at the time there was a huge drive among at least the membership down here to get CS to raise the retirement benefits and they had fastly sat on their hands in doing so. In hindsight maybe they should have sat harder but what's done is done. I personally believe the benefits were raised as a result of the UPS offer but let's look at it another way. </p><p> </p><p>I also believe UPS knew full good and well what the current and future state of affairs were with CS and other funds and that any increase could and would result in future problems. Now there's no way UPS could know that starting about 2 years later (1999') the investment bubble would burst, 9/11 would happen and oil prices and medical costs would go through the roof so in fairness to them the negative impact they were expecting may have been either much further out or at a much lesser rate. It's obvious their actions in the last couple of years has taken on a greater accelerated rate of trying to lessen any negative impact should the situation grow far worse than it already is. I can understand and appreciate that. Now regardless of all this UPS played a chessgame and frankly made a pretty good move if you factor out the chaos from 99' on but the point is their effort no matter the motive did in a certain way help accelerate where we are now. I won't say they set out to do this as I'll give them the benefit of doubt that beyond not getting the pension, they knew it was a longshot at best, they were also trying to drive the funds to just where they are right now. I don't believe that is what they were after. However in hindsight based on demographic information they had via the trustees it was clear a storm was on the near horizon. You might even go as far to say that their offer back in 97' was irresponsible but I won't say that myself. Just knowing where we are today and the fact that they had access to info we may or may not have had could give rise to that charge from some quarters. </p><p> </p><p>What's the real answer. Go back up and read the 4 issues I listed and I believe in some shape or form the real answer is some combination of all 4. Many of these issues are married to one another as I also believe it possible to provide us with a greatand very secure retirement while saving the company huge amounts of money shorterm and longterm. Can and will that happen? I don't have that answer but I will say this, the window of opportunity is open right now but it will close at some point. UPS sits in the catbird seat the longer it goes because like OK2BC I also believe UPS via legislation will limit it's exposure and the problem will grow worse and the benefits will be cut more. When they are cut more so will UPS' offer to take it over. We are IMO about to enter a phase of trying to catch a falling knife and not matter what you do you're gonna get cut! </p><p>JMHO. </p><p> </p><p>(Message edited by wkmac on May 27, 2005)</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="wkmac, post: 54926"] isdrone, I do agree that the pension situation does place UPS in harms way however a nuclear scenario would have to take place and the chances of that are minimal at best. At the same time I do believe we as UPSers covered by these multi pension plans should take note of this and keep this in mind and what it would do to us even on an individual level it this should occur. I believe the effect would not so much be to our retirement but it could very well effect our jobs depending on the severity. As for the 1997' offer, I just don't think any of us can really throw that around as set in stone. I do agree that the union matched the company offer to counter what the company did but let's look at it from several perspectives. Was it sincere or a ploy to scuttle the impending strike? This offer was literally a midnight offer in the sense it was at the last minute and there were way to many unanswered questions with the whole proposal. On it's face it looked good but it just had some blank spots that no one had answers for. UPS should have thrown this out weeks earlier but that was complicated by the fact that bothsides were in agreement no information or news from contract talks would be made public. I happen to be in absolute complete disagreement with this approach which both sides still maintain but they've agreed to it so there you go. It could probably be said bothsides live and die by that sword. Secondly, UPS knew the fragile state the various pensions were headed in and this is where it gets cloudy and will depend on your attitude toward the company. On the one hand you have the argument the company saw the trouble and wanted to watch out for and protect us and came up with this idea to do it. Then you have the position the company saw the huge liability they faced and what it would do to them and yes even us and wanted to get out. Thirdly, by controlling the entire pension fund they could limit the cost and drive up the bottomline and lastly they could muddy the water enough to fragment the strike and maybe kill it before it even began. Now the offer played well down here in the south because quite frankly we don't have a history of union involvment like other parts of the country so the loyality to a union isn't that great to begin with. We just want what we can get and it makes no difference to much from whom we get it. Couple that with at the time there was a huge drive among at least the membership down here to get CS to raise the retirement benefits and they had fastly sat on their hands in doing so. In hindsight maybe they should have sat harder but what's done is done. I personally believe the benefits were raised as a result of the UPS offer but let's look at it another way. I also believe UPS knew full good and well what the current and future state of affairs were with CS and other funds and that any increase could and would result in future problems. Now there's no way UPS could know that starting about 2 years later (1999') the investment bubble would burst, 9/11 would happen and oil prices and medical costs would go through the roof so in fairness to them the negative impact they were expecting may have been either much further out or at a much lesser rate. It's obvious their actions in the last couple of years has taken on a greater accelerated rate of trying to lessen any negative impact should the situation grow far worse than it already is. I can understand and appreciate that. Now regardless of all this UPS played a chessgame and frankly made a pretty good move if you factor out the chaos from 99' on but the point is their effort no matter the motive did in a certain way help accelerate where we are now. I won't say they set out to do this as I'll give them the benefit of doubt that beyond not getting the pension, they knew it was a longshot at best, they were also trying to drive the funds to just where they are right now. I don't believe that is what they were after. However in hindsight based on demographic information they had via the trustees it was clear a storm was on the near horizon. You might even go as far to say that their offer back in 97' was irresponsible but I won't say that myself. Just knowing where we are today and the fact that they had access to info we may or may not have had could give rise to that charge from some quarters. What's the real answer. Go back up and read the 4 issues I listed and I believe in some shape or form the real answer is some combination of all 4. Many of these issues are married to one another as I also believe it possible to provide us with a greatand very secure retirement while saving the company huge amounts of money shorterm and longterm. Can and will that happen? I don't have that answer but I will say this, the window of opportunity is open right now but it will close at some point. UPS sits in the catbird seat the longer it goes because like OK2BC I also believe UPS via legislation will limit it's exposure and the problem will grow worse and the benefits will be cut more. When they are cut more so will UPS' offer to take it over. We are IMO about to enter a phase of trying to catch a falling knife and not matter what you do you're gonna get cut! JMHO. (Message edited by wkmac on May 27, 2005) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Retirement Topics
Pension Agency Faces a New Front
Top