Pension letter

[rod]

Retirees just sit at home all day do they really need all that money?




(I kid )

Hey!---we have to be able to pay for booze and high speed internet so we can keep up with the latest porn. I do save on clothes though--- just sitting around in my underwear.

 

[rod]

Using Rods age(70) at 32,800 paid out for 16 years is only 2734 a month. That's 525,000. A retiree today receiving 4000 a month will get 48,000 a year, and at 16 years would have received 768,000. Food for thought. Pretty nice to work at UPS when you look at it this way.

Don't start shoveling dirt on me yet---I'm only 67.

 

[McGee]

I bet 75% of the young people wouldn't save a dime toward retirement if given that option.

You are right, my previous job automatically opened an account for you . That way you didn't have to worry about it.

 

[By The Book]

Don't start shoveling dirt on me yet---I'm only 67.

Well crap! My pension numbers are all wrong for you then.

 

[retired2000]

We have to pay for our toys

 

[By The Book]

What does upstate.....the driver have to say about this? Has he had time to research?

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

What does upstate.....the driver have to say about this? Has he had time to research?

Still working on it.

 

[What'dyabringmetoday???]

What does upstate.....the driver have to say about this? Has he had time to research?

If you follow any of his posts regarding his vast savings, you will know that he will be perfectly fine.

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

If you follow any of his posts regarding his vast savings, you will know that he will be perfectly fine.

What is your take on "curtailment of benefits accrual"?

 

[What'dyabringmetoday???]

What is your take on "curtailment of benefits accrual"?

I think it means that your benefits accrual will be curtailed. Lol. Ok, enough of the sarcasm- probably means that the benefit will be a set figure and not increase the longer we work. This pension fund is in terrible shape. Unfortunately, the ying-yangs that are in charge refused to address this back when they should have. It won't affect my retirement plans much.

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

I think it means that your benefits accrual will be curtailed. Lol. Ok, enough of the sarcasm- probably means that the benefit will be a set figure and not increase the longer we work. This pension fund is in terrible shape. Unfortunately, the ying-yangs that are in charge refused to address this back when they should have. It won't affect my retirement plans much.

Mine either but thanks for the explanation.

 

[What'dyabringmetoday???]

Mine either but thanks for the explanation.

The offer from 1997 is looking pretty good now. Oh well.

 

[brownmonster]

My wife and I increased our 401ks by 4% each this week.

 

[By The Book]

Mine either but thanks for the explanation.

I would think it would mean to reduce it to a set percentage. This is not set in stone either as it can be changed by the trustees. An example would be if your accrual rate was 2.5%, it could be reduced to 1.25% so the plan can meet future obligations and remain solvent. I'm wondering if your trustees will reduce what past retirees receive or will it only affect future retirees. If the fund is in real bad shape all options, I would think could be on the table. Higher retirement ages, set amounts, etc.

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

I would think it would mean to reduce it to a set percentage. This is not set in stone either as it can be changed by the trustees. An example would be if your accrual rate was 2.5%, it could be reduced to 1.25% so the plan can meet future obligations and remain solvent. I'm wondering if your trustees will reduce what past retirees receive or will it only affect future retirees. If the fund is in real bad shape all options, I would think could be on the table. Higher retirement ages, set amounts, etc.

I can only imagine the reaction if they were to go after those already receiving their pensions.

 

[retired2000]

They are going after the retirees talk is up to 50 percent

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

They are going after the retirees talk is up to 50 percent

So the retirees who are divorced and already giving 50% to their ex will in essence receive 25% of the pension that they would have received had they stayed married. ($5K/month divided by 2 = $2.5K. 50% of $5K is $2.5K $2.5K/2 = $1.25K, which is 25% of $5K. Ouch!)

 

[BROWNCAT]

One of the few times it paid to be management

Newer management are not getting a pension, only an "enhanced" 401K.

 

[hellfire]

Yeah, and yet we're still here.

Because the company gave up

 

[kingOFchester]

I am not naive enough to rely solely on a pension for retirement. Luckily my wife is a financial guru in many ways. That doesn't mean I will happily say "Oh this is the way the world works now", like everyone seems to be ok saying with our benefits slowly disappearing. This company is making RECORD profits. I want what is promised. It's part of our pay as far as I'm concerned. If it's not gonna be there, put it in my check and I will invest it.

I agree, but for my local, UPS has fulfilled their obligation by paying into the Teamsters pension. The Teamsters are the ones who are responsible for MY money. Ugh.