S
sawman
Guest
By the way, it is not a bunch of rookies handling our futures by themselves. They have lawyers and one of the largest finacial institutes in the world on board.
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.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
O
ok2bclever
Guest
wkmac,
"And you're worried about what rookies will do?".
Yep, that about sums it up.
Tommy, your proposed plan looks good.
I don't have a problem with that.
Your challenge is easily met though.
I could make up a proposed plan for twice everything you offer there.
The key is whether they can actually be made available to us and a statement that the movement may fold at any moment due to lack of funds and commitment does not give me warm feelings.
I do feel that my devil's advocate propensity is leading me to sound too much like a supporter of the status quo which I am certainly not so I think I might try to just listen for a while on this issue.
PS - Just so no one is misled, I am not, nor have ever meant to state this group is led by rookies.
I don't have a clue, so I wouldn't want to make that type of statement.
What I have said is much of the initial rhetoric sounds like rookie statements.
There is a difference, and I apologize if anyone has gotten the idea that I am stating otherwise.
(Message edited by ok2bclever on February 20, 2005)
"And you're worried about what rookies will do?".
Yep, that about sums it up.
Tommy, your proposed plan looks good.
I don't have a problem with that.
Your challenge is easily met though.
I could make up a proposed plan for twice everything you offer there.
The key is whether they can actually be made available to us and a statement that the movement may fold at any moment due to lack of funds and commitment does not give me warm feelings.
I do feel that my devil's advocate propensity is leading me to sound too much like a supporter of the status quo which I am certainly not so I think I might try to just listen for a while on this issue.
PS - Just so no one is misled, I am not, nor have ever meant to state this group is led by rookies.
I don't have a clue, so I wouldn't want to make that type of statement.
What I have said is much of the initial rhetoric sounds like rookie statements.
There is a difference, and I apologize if anyone has gotten the idea that I am stating otherwise.
(Message edited by ok2bclever on February 20, 2005)
S
sawman
Guest
Ok2, It is not my plan. WHile I am a member of the APWA, I am not an officer of the APWA.
I am only stating my thoughts on the matter, and in no way do I claim to have all the answers, but if you go to the APWA web page you can email them and get an answer to any question that you might have.
I am only stating my thoughts on the matter, and in no way do I claim to have all the answers, but if you go to the APWA web page you can email them and get an answer to any question that you might have.
F
feeders
Guest
A lot of people have the impression that the APWA has sprung up over night. We started over two years ago when we got letters from Central States saying that our pension was slashed. We told our local union leaders that we were going to do something about it. They grumbled and said all the uproar would reach a fever pitch and die.
They said the employees would go back to their regular pacifist routines, and look to the locals to make their decisions for them. We went into our own pockets to get things to the point they are now. We knew we couldn't do this alone, but me made a commitment to each other that we would try.
We have 6 attorneys not just one, providing the legal expertise required to do this. Nothing is posted on the website until cleared by all six. All financial statements concerning what pension accruals would be are factual. From the website, to the 50,000 ad flyers, we are doing as much as we can to get the word out to our people.
It is imperative that our people know what we are trying to do, then decided for themselves. The Labor Reform Act gives us the employees the legal right to self organize. Make no mistake about it, the other side is coming after us tooth and nail, and we expected it.
Some say that we are just dreaming. We say that if you can see it in your mind, then you can make it happen! We now have people on the ground in 37 states.
COME STAND WITH US!
(Message edited by feeders on February 20, 2005)
(Message edited by feeders on February 20, 2005)
They said the employees would go back to their regular pacifist routines, and look to the locals to make their decisions for them. We went into our own pockets to get things to the point they are now. We knew we couldn't do this alone, but me made a commitment to each other that we would try.
We have 6 attorneys not just one, providing the legal expertise required to do this. Nothing is posted on the website until cleared by all six. All financial statements concerning what pension accruals would be are factual. From the website, to the 50,000 ad flyers, we are doing as much as we can to get the word out to our people.
It is imperative that our people know what we are trying to do, then decided for themselves. The Labor Reform Act gives us the employees the legal right to self organize. Make no mistake about it, the other side is coming after us tooth and nail, and we expected it.
Some say that we are just dreaming. We say that if you can see it in your mind, then you can make it happen! We now have people on the ground in 37 states.
COME STAND WITH US!
(Message edited by feeders on February 20, 2005)
(Message edited by feeders on February 20, 2005)
O
ok2bclever
Guest
fe, that just goes to show you haven't been here long or don't read thoroughly.
If you read into my statements that I believe UPS is an evil empire it's just the slant you are reading into it because you cannot accept any critism regarding the company.
No one here recognizes the business brilliance and competency of UPS more than I.
The statement "UPS is a very knowledgable and ruthlessly efficient corporate machine" is not a condemnation, but a recognition of the facts.
Don't expect charity from the company.
That doesn't make them evil, but it also doesn't make them benevolent or your "friend" as they state over and over whenever they are not attempting to discipline you.
They are simply your employer.
As far as pensions and benefits, those we have were negotiated for us by our union.
Neither UPS, nor all the non-union companies give them to us "out of the goodness of their hearts".
UPS does so out of negotiations and considerations of the best way to obtain and retain a good workforce.
Non-union companies have had to "copy" to lesser extents "like" benefits to compete for employees.
Tommy, sloppy language on my part, I wasn't meaning you in particular.
What I have read on the APWA website I agree with and is the way a union SHOULD be.
This should be interesting.
I sincerely wish the organization luck.
I will be watching developments closely and would love to be convinced this is real so I could stand with you.
(Message edited by ok2bclever on February 20, 2005)
If you read into my statements that I believe UPS is an evil empire it's just the slant you are reading into it because you cannot accept any critism regarding the company.
No one here recognizes the business brilliance and competency of UPS more than I.
The statement "UPS is a very knowledgable and ruthlessly efficient corporate machine" is not a condemnation, but a recognition of the facts.
Don't expect charity from the company.
That doesn't make them evil, but it also doesn't make them benevolent or your "friend" as they state over and over whenever they are not attempting to discipline you.
They are simply your employer.
As far as pensions and benefits, those we have were negotiated for us by our union.
Neither UPS, nor all the non-union companies give them to us "out of the goodness of their hearts".
UPS does so out of negotiations and considerations of the best way to obtain and retain a good workforce.
Non-union companies have had to "copy" to lesser extents "like" benefits to compete for employees.
Tommy, sloppy language on my part, I wasn't meaning you in particular.
What I have read on the APWA website I agree with and is the way a union SHOULD be.
This should be interesting.
I sincerely wish the organization luck.
I will be watching developments closely and would love to be convinced this is real so I could stand with you.
(Message edited by ok2bclever on February 20, 2005)
T
tieguy
Guest
"That said, the multi-employer funds are subsidized by companies contributing money per working employee, equally proportionally from my understanding.
UPS does NOT put in more than anyone else per employee.
They put in whatever was negotiated, just like all the rest."
Did you read anything I posted or did you simply throw another one of your classic tantrums.
Let me post again and try to pay attention this time:
Today the ratio has swung to one active ups employee funding for two retirees.
Now just to address your point when it gets down to UPS being the last company left in the central states plan then yes ups will be expected to fund it and keep it going above and beyond the contractual language.
The IRS minimum funding requirements place increased potential liability on the remaining companies in a mult-employer pension plan.
OK you really need to do your homework instead of trying to defend something you know nothing about.
UPS does NOT put in more than anyone else per employee.
They put in whatever was negotiated, just like all the rest."
Did you read anything I posted or did you simply throw another one of your classic tantrums.
Let me post again and try to pay attention this time:
Today the ratio has swung to one active ups employee funding for two retirees.
Now just to address your point when it gets down to UPS being the last company left in the central states plan then yes ups will be expected to fund it and keep it going above and beyond the contractual language.
The IRS minimum funding requirements place increased potential liability on the remaining companies in a mult-employer pension plan.
OK you really need to do your homework instead of trying to defend something you know nothing about.
T
tieguy
Guest
man you folks are hitting this one heavy. As I read further along I see that some of what is addressed and answered. Good for you.
The fact is if the Central states plan loses more employers than the IRS will require those that remain to make up the difference regardless of contractual obligations. At that point UPS could be forced to throw more money into this leaking bucket. Now it is clear that UPS's efforts in the past to move you folks into single employer plans has been at least partially driven by this impending obligation. If central states does not get its act together than central states could be a huge drain on this company.
The fact is if the Central states plan loses more employers than the IRS will require those that remain to make up the difference regardless of contractual obligations. At that point UPS could be forced to throw more money into this leaking bucket. Now it is clear that UPS's efforts in the past to move you folks into single employer plans has been at least partially driven by this impending obligation. If central states does not get its act together than central states could be a huge drain on this company.
D
dannyboy
Guest
"That you think it is unfair in some way that the pension plan is not an inheritance plan for those who started having kids late is an strange idea."
OK, That statement is like one I heard last week from a doctors office. I tried to set up an appointment for my daughter and was informed that she could not see the doctor until I paid the ballance due. When I asked why I had not gotten a bill, she informed me that the reason no bill was issued is because insurance had overpaid and I had a positive ballance on paper, $592.00, but in reality I owed them $252.00. Bills can only be issued when there is a ballance due. Now in my simple mind, I should have a credit of $340.00. The overpayment was made more than 3 years ago, and since the insurance company has been switched three times, they are not interested in getting a refund.
THat brings me to the conversation this past week. The office manager stated that the money will be returned to the insurance company when they request it (yeah right) and is not for my use or benefit.
Well then whose use and benefit is it for, theirs? IT was money paid by my insurance, that we paid for, for my covered daughter. Well lemme see, in my poor limmited mind, I cant use the money for future expenses, but they can and have used it for whatever they want? and you think that is a good thing?
The same holds true for the pension. While there should not be a monthly payout, that money is still mine, put into the fund for me. It is a benefit that I have earned, same as my wage. IT is just the same as if I had placed it into the 401K. After 31 years there should be a cash value that is paid out to the estate of the retired member. That is the way it is in many other pension plans, if the person dies before retiring, there is a lump sum payment made to the estate.
Of course in your mind, I should just leave that money to the teamsters, I guess they earned it for all the representation they have given me?
d
OK, That statement is like one I heard last week from a doctors office. I tried to set up an appointment for my daughter and was informed that she could not see the doctor until I paid the ballance due. When I asked why I had not gotten a bill, she informed me that the reason no bill was issued is because insurance had overpaid and I had a positive ballance on paper, $592.00, but in reality I owed them $252.00. Bills can only be issued when there is a ballance due. Now in my simple mind, I should have a credit of $340.00. The overpayment was made more than 3 years ago, and since the insurance company has been switched three times, they are not interested in getting a refund.
THat brings me to the conversation this past week. The office manager stated that the money will be returned to the insurance company when they request it (yeah right) and is not for my use or benefit.
Well then whose use and benefit is it for, theirs? IT was money paid by my insurance, that we paid for, for my covered daughter. Well lemme see, in my poor limmited mind, I cant use the money for future expenses, but they can and have used it for whatever they want? and you think that is a good thing?
The same holds true for the pension. While there should not be a monthly payout, that money is still mine, put into the fund for me. It is a benefit that I have earned, same as my wage. IT is just the same as if I had placed it into the 401K. After 31 years there should be a cash value that is paid out to the estate of the retired member. That is the way it is in many other pension plans, if the person dies before retiring, there is a lump sum payment made to the estate.
Of course in your mind, I should just leave that money to the teamsters, I guess they earned it for all the representation they have given me?
d
D
dannyboy
Guest
Mr Benbow
IF you would please contact me, If what you are saying and have posted is real, then I would like to participate. Count me in!
I would much rather have my pension in the hands of well meaning and honest "rookies" than the experienced crooked thieves that currently are in control.
d
(Message edited by dannyboy on February 20, 2005)
IF you would please contact me, If what you are saying and have posted is real, then I would like to participate. Count me in!
I would much rather have my pension in the hands of well meaning and honest "rookies" than the experienced crooked thieves that currently are in control.
d
(Message edited by dannyboy on February 20, 2005)
O
ok2bclever
Guest
Actually, I have heard the ratio stated worse, not a good thing.
The CS states 150,00 plus active participants and 206,00 plus retirees and surviving spouses.
Those stats would make the ratio 1:1.37, but regardless the trend will continue to excerbate the funds as more and more baby boomers retire.
And the only thing I have heard UPS trying to do is to shut down their responsibilities to the fund.
Now I understand their desire for this from their business standpoint, but frankly if they succeed that would be very detrimental to us and the fund.
I don't blame them for trying, I just hope they don't succeed as they haven't stated they will do anything to help us even if they do succeed.
Their move to skyrocket our medical premiums tells me they won't do anything to improve our future.
danny, that is a really bizarre story ya got there, but what that has to do with you not being happy with the realities of the pension fund is a bit hazy.
The fund never was designed to be a inheritance plan and the fact that there might be plans out there are designed to be inheritance plans has about as much to do with our already troubled fund that is having trouble keeping up with it's current commitments as the fact that I deserve to hit the MegaMillions.
That reminds me, I need to check Friday's ticket.
The pension is not an or like a 401k and doesn't have a cash value.
You are leaving that money in the pension fund whether you want to or not unless you live a long long time so just break down and buy some insurance if you have been napping on this issue.
I think you have a better head than that though and believe you have protected your kids and not left that up to UPS, the Teamsters and the Tooth Fairy.
Because the Tooth Fairy is your best shot between those three.
I think the difference here is I am talking about what is and you are talking about what you wish was.
Yours will be more popular because most people would rather talk about what should be than to recognize what is and be willing to get down in the trenches and try to make it different.
I think you may be an exception to that, but unfortunately that is the problem.
Too many mouths and not enough hands.
I personally would rather have experienced crooked thieves being monitored by the government (under the theory of "it takes a thief") than honest rookies when put up against UPS (under the theory of "it takes a thief") where my family's welfare is concerned.
Perhaps we can have the best of worlds though and have honest experienced representatives.
That goes back to the statement of "how could it be worse".
Ya donna wanna know.
I do like the new union's ten year qualification for any position.
That should eliminate most of the supervisors to be wannabees that use the union position as just another rung on the company ladder.
The CS states 150,00 plus active participants and 206,00 plus retirees and surviving spouses.
Those stats would make the ratio 1:1.37, but regardless the trend will continue to excerbate the funds as more and more baby boomers retire.
And the only thing I have heard UPS trying to do is to shut down their responsibilities to the fund.
Now I understand their desire for this from their business standpoint, but frankly if they succeed that would be very detrimental to us and the fund.
I don't blame them for trying, I just hope they don't succeed as they haven't stated they will do anything to help us even if they do succeed.
Their move to skyrocket our medical premiums tells me they won't do anything to improve our future.
danny, that is a really bizarre story ya got there, but what that has to do with you not being happy with the realities of the pension fund is a bit hazy.
The fund never was designed to be a inheritance plan and the fact that there might be plans out there are designed to be inheritance plans has about as much to do with our already troubled fund that is having trouble keeping up with it's current commitments as the fact that I deserve to hit the MegaMillions.
That reminds me, I need to check Friday's ticket.
The pension is not an or like a 401k and doesn't have a cash value.
You are leaving that money in the pension fund whether you want to or not unless you live a long long time so just break down and buy some insurance if you have been napping on this issue.
I think you have a better head than that though and believe you have protected your kids and not left that up to UPS, the Teamsters and the Tooth Fairy.
Because the Tooth Fairy is your best shot between those three.
I think the difference here is I am talking about what is and you are talking about what you wish was.
Yours will be more popular because most people would rather talk about what should be than to recognize what is and be willing to get down in the trenches and try to make it different.
I think you may be an exception to that, but unfortunately that is the problem.
Too many mouths and not enough hands.
I personally would rather have experienced crooked thieves being monitored by the government (under the theory of "it takes a thief") than honest rookies when put up against UPS (under the theory of "it takes a thief") where my family's welfare is concerned.
Perhaps we can have the best of worlds though and have honest experienced representatives.
That goes back to the statement of "how could it be worse".
Ya donna wanna know.
I do like the new union's ten year qualification for any position.
That should eliminate most of the supervisors to be wannabees that use the union position as just another rung on the company ladder.
O
ok2bclever
Guest
I took your suggestion Tommy to ask the website a question.
I have to say it was refreshing to get a prompt reply to a question, on a Sunday no less.
I could get use to that.
I have to say it was refreshing to get a prompt reply to a question, on a Sunday no less.
I could get use to that.
S
sawman
Guest
Ok2, that's great! I'm glad you checked the web site out. At this early stage, that is what the APWA needs. We want people to be aware that we no longer have to settle for the crumbs the teamsters throw us, there is another option. It's not going to be an easy road, but we have an ever growing following and are determined to make a differance. Our pension and health care can and will be back to the high standards that we have grown to expect. It is there for the taking and together we can regain control of our futures.
APWA COME JUMP IN THE WATER IS FINE!
APWA COME JUMP IN THE WATER IS FINE!
F
feguy
Guest
From ok2bAnIdiot:
"And the only thing I have heard UPS trying to do is to shut down their responsibilities to the fund."
That is a complete fabrication, and you can't get away with it here.
UPS has honored every responsibility to every fund they are party to, and their position is to continue doing it.
Deal with reality, not your slant on it.
"And the only thing I have heard UPS trying to do is to shut down their responsibilities to the fund."
That is a complete fabrication, and you can't get away with it here.
UPS has honored every responsibility to every fund they are party to, and their position is to continue doing it.
Deal with reality, not your slant on it.
D
dannyboy
Guest
Ok
look up vested interests in the dictionary.
best
d
look up vested interests in the dictionary.
best
d
O
ok2bclever
Guest
tie, you got a brother or an unregistered alias, all of fe's posts tend to be disdainful of workers?
It is interesting fe that you start childish name calling when a simple fact about what the company is trying to do is mentioned?
Anyway, the company is lobbying with everything they got to stop any increase of future liabilities to the fund.
That is the simple truth, so I am going to say it here and it's not a fabrication.
As mentioned, I understand their business reasoning, but the fact remains if they manage to persuade the government to change the laws through lobbying (for anyone not familiar with the term lobbying, it's an acceptable form of bribing members of the government to do what a special interest group wants) it would be good for UPS and bad for UPS pension members and the pension itself.
(Message edited by ok2bclever on February 21, 2005)
It is interesting fe that you start childish name calling when a simple fact about what the company is trying to do is mentioned?
Anyway, the company is lobbying with everything they got to stop any increase of future liabilities to the fund.
That is the simple truth, so I am going to say it here and it's not a fabrication.
As mentioned, I understand their business reasoning, but the fact remains if they manage to persuade the government to change the laws through lobbying (for anyone not familiar with the term lobbying, it's an acceptable form of bribing members of the government to do what a special interest group wants) it would be good for UPS and bad for UPS pension members and the pension itself.
(Message edited by ok2bclever on February 21, 2005)
D
dannyboy
Guest
OK
From your posts, you seem to have a limited knowledge of what is going on. UPS is not trying to shaft the UPS retirees, they just dont feel that they ought to make good on promises made to retirees of other companies. There is only so much money they can afford to place into a pension fund, and the more they place into central states to shore up the hemorage there, the less they have to increase the funding of ours.
As for making that decision, there comes a time when a person who has gangrene needs to make a choice, do I keep the leg or arm and die, or get it cut off to survive. After several years of trying every means they know of to fix the problem, they now know that to get out while only supporting the UPS workers is no longer an option. For better or worse, you are all in the same sinking boat. And unless UPS can cut the losses now and attempt to rebuild......
You ever asked how many of the funds 200,000+ retirees are UPS employees? And how much percentage wise UPS puts into the fund? And how many of the current employees are UPS employees?
Do the math.
I dont know if the new association could pull central states out of the slide they are in, but I really dont see much of a choice.
As far as letting our gooberment watch the union, that is like letting the fox watch the weasle secure the henhouse.
d
From your posts, you seem to have a limited knowledge of what is going on. UPS is not trying to shaft the UPS retirees, they just dont feel that they ought to make good on promises made to retirees of other companies. There is only so much money they can afford to place into a pension fund, and the more they place into central states to shore up the hemorage there, the less they have to increase the funding of ours.
As for making that decision, there comes a time when a person who has gangrene needs to make a choice, do I keep the leg or arm and die, or get it cut off to survive. After several years of trying every means they know of to fix the problem, they now know that to get out while only supporting the UPS workers is no longer an option. For better or worse, you are all in the same sinking boat. And unless UPS can cut the losses now and attempt to rebuild......
You ever asked how many of the funds 200,000+ retirees are UPS employees? And how much percentage wise UPS puts into the fund? And how many of the current employees are UPS employees?
Do the math.
I dont know if the new association could pull central states out of the slide they are in, but I really dont see much of a choice.
As far as letting our gooberment watch the union, that is like letting the fox watch the weasle secure the henhouse.
d
O
ok2bclever
Guest
Danny,
I can find "vested interest" in the dictionary, but I couldn't find it in the pension documents.
Wait a minute, I know the problem.
I was looking in the FAQ section when I probably should have been looking in the "things danny and I wish for" section.
As far as limited knowledge, I consider you knowledgeable in general, but please don't try to talk down to me, leave that to tie.
My knowledge on this subject is current and well rounded.
While I don't recall using the words "UPS is trying to shaft it's retirees", that would be the ultimate result if they succeed in stopping their future liabilities.
UPS is attempting to limit their future liability to the pension fund we belong to through lobbying and legistlation and while these attempts are very visible the same cannot be said about any plans or intentions to do anything for our (UPS workers) futures.
I don't fault them from doing this from their business standpoint , but it will be detrimental to our pension fund if they succeed.
The gangrene example is not really a good analogy as you cannot separate UPS retirees from the rest in the fund.
The fund is all or nothing.
If you think the fund will recognize that UPS is still contributing for it's workers and so if the fund violates the ERISA funding rules they will continue to pay our full retirement benefits while defaulting to the grand a month for everyone else you are incorrect.
It doesn't work that way.
Also, APWA is not planning on having anything to do with the Central States Pension Plan and frankly, I don't blame them.
They are intending to set up a totally independent separate one.
We would get whatever we have earned from Central States and whatever we earn from the new APWA once it's set up.
This is directly from the APWA.
That is fine in theory, but if UPS pulling out of the CSPF causes it to default we would be down to the $1075 a month from that plan and you won't have accrued anything from the APWA fund if it is even set up in the next 520 days.
It would be a far better plan and future for younger drivers if it actually could become a reality and they should jump to get behind it.
I can find "vested interest" in the dictionary, but I couldn't find it in the pension documents.
Wait a minute, I know the problem.
I was looking in the FAQ section when I probably should have been looking in the "things danny and I wish for" section.
As far as limited knowledge, I consider you knowledgeable in general, but please don't try to talk down to me, leave that to tie.
My knowledge on this subject is current and well rounded.
While I don't recall using the words "UPS is trying to shaft it's retirees", that would be the ultimate result if they succeed in stopping their future liabilities.
UPS is attempting to limit their future liability to the pension fund we belong to through lobbying and legistlation and while these attempts are very visible the same cannot be said about any plans or intentions to do anything for our (UPS workers) futures.
I don't fault them from doing this from their business standpoint , but it will be detrimental to our pension fund if they succeed.
The gangrene example is not really a good analogy as you cannot separate UPS retirees from the rest in the fund.
The fund is all or nothing.
If you think the fund will recognize that UPS is still contributing for it's workers and so if the fund violates the ERISA funding rules they will continue to pay our full retirement benefits while defaulting to the grand a month for everyone else you are incorrect.
It doesn't work that way.
Also, APWA is not planning on having anything to do with the Central States Pension Plan and frankly, I don't blame them.
They are intending to set up a totally independent separate one.
We would get whatever we have earned from Central States and whatever we earn from the new APWA once it's set up.
This is directly from the APWA.
That is fine in theory, but if UPS pulling out of the CSPF causes it to default we would be down to the $1075 a month from that plan and you won't have accrued anything from the APWA fund if it is even set up in the next 520 days.
It would be a far better plan and future for younger drivers if it actually could become a reality and they should jump to get behind it.
M
my2cents
Guest
After a few emails and a phone conversation with an APWA representative, I took the plunge and joined. The choice was a totally free and voluntary one. Nobody shoving a card under my nose to sign, which is something I liked.
I can't see what I have to lose, especially given the fact I resigned my Teamster membership several years ago. Worst case, I'm out $150, even though I don't consider it throwing money away. Currently waiting on my membership card and some informational materials, which should arrive within the next 2 weeks or so. Feeders and Sawman, you gained a member from New England.
(Message edited by my2cents on February 21, 2005)
I can't see what I have to lose, especially given the fact I resigned my Teamster membership several years ago. Worst case, I'm out $150, even though I don't consider it throwing money away. Currently waiting on my membership card and some informational materials, which should arrive within the next 2 weeks or so. Feeders and Sawman, you gained a member from New England.
(Message edited by my2cents on February 21, 2005)
D
dannyboy
Guest
Smart ass!
Actually you and I are saying the same thing. The persons that are in the central states are screwed, and long term screwed, because of all the extra non UPS baggage that they have to pay benefits on. And the fact that they can not be separated into UPS and non UPS retirees and UPS can not choose who gets the money.
THe analogy of the arm is that UPS knows that if they do not get rid of the large draw now, it will only get worse, and more UPS retirees will get hurt. Limit the scope of the damage now while they still can, instead of loosing not only the hand and arm, but also a shoulder as well or worse? Not a good position to be in when the decision is made, but it still has to be made. And yes, people will get hurt and loose much of what they have worked for. THat is one of the problems with the multi-employer plan.
But it is also a fact that it has become a major sinkhole for money that is not producing any type of benefit for the UPS retiree.
And for me, a new union with a new benefit plan, its too late. Shame something like this didnt come allong 5 or 10 years ago.
Personally, what I would love to see happen is that UPS is able to buy its way out of funds like the central states and have the money put into funds that return money on investments.
BTW, what are the actual numbers on central states, UPS % of active and UPS % of retired? I dont recall anyone ever stating those numbers.
Also what is the amount that UPS puts into central states?
My retirement book says that I am vested after 5 years. " "things danny and I wish for" section."
I guess the tooth fairy must like me more than you
best
d
Actually you and I are saying the same thing. The persons that are in the central states are screwed, and long term screwed, because of all the extra non UPS baggage that they have to pay benefits on. And the fact that they can not be separated into UPS and non UPS retirees and UPS can not choose who gets the money.
THe analogy of the arm is that UPS knows that if they do not get rid of the large draw now, it will only get worse, and more UPS retirees will get hurt. Limit the scope of the damage now while they still can, instead of loosing not only the hand and arm, but also a shoulder as well or worse? Not a good position to be in when the decision is made, but it still has to be made. And yes, people will get hurt and loose much of what they have worked for. THat is one of the problems with the multi-employer plan.
But it is also a fact that it has become a major sinkhole for money that is not producing any type of benefit for the UPS retiree.
And for me, a new union with a new benefit plan, its too late. Shame something like this didnt come allong 5 or 10 years ago.
Personally, what I would love to see happen is that UPS is able to buy its way out of funds like the central states and have the money put into funds that return money on investments.
BTW, what are the actual numbers on central states, UPS % of active and UPS % of retired? I dont recall anyone ever stating those numbers.
Also what is the amount that UPS puts into central states?
My retirement book says that I am vested after 5 years. " "things danny and I wish for" section."
I guess the tooth fairy must like me more than you
best
d
O
ok2bclever
Guest
I thought you were referring to your "estate inheritance" when you referred to "vested interest", you weren't?
Ok, I agree and did from the beginning that cutting the gangrene away (what an analogy!) would benefit UPS.
However, we are part of the gangrene.
What's the benefit for us?
UPS hasn't given any sign they are looking out for us.
In fact, just the opposite what with their decision regarding our retiree medical benefits.
Neither the fund, nor UPS breaks down the specifics regarding how many UPSers are in Central States and I doubt either will give us that answer, so who knows?
Educated guess, UPSers are a real minority of the collectors and while certainly no where near the majority of the contributors, we are (through UPS negotiated contributions per employee) a significant contribution factor.
Ok, I agree and did from the beginning that cutting the gangrene away (what an analogy!) would benefit UPS.
However, we are part of the gangrene.
What's the benefit for us?
UPS hasn't given any sign they are looking out for us.
In fact, just the opposite what with their decision regarding our retiree medical benefits.
Neither the fund, nor UPS breaks down the specifics regarding how many UPSers are in Central States and I doubt either will give us that answer, so who knows?
Educated guess, UPSers are a real minority of the collectors and while certainly no where near the majority of the contributors, we are (through UPS negotiated contributions per employee) a significant contribution factor.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 62
- Views
- 11K
- Replies
- 579
- Views
- 48K
- Replies
- 136
- Views
- 15K
