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 Union Issues
UPS EMPLOYEES START NEW UNION!
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="ok2bclever" data-source="post: 55480"><p>Danny,</p><p></p><p>I can find "vested interest" in the dictionary, but I couldn't find it in the pension documents.</p><p></p><p>Wait a minute, I know the problem. </p><p></p><p>I was looking in the FAQ section when I probably should have been looking in the "things danny and I wish for" section. </p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>My knowledge on this subject is current and well rounded.</p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>UPS <strong>is</strong> 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.</p><p></p><p>I don't fault them from doing this from their business standpoint , but it <strong>will</strong> be detrimental to our pension fund if they succeed.</p><p></p><p>The gangrene example is not really a good analogy as you cannot separate UPS retirees from the rest in the fund.</p><p></p><p>The fund is all or nothing. </p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>It doesn't work that way.</p><p></p><p>Also, APWA is not planning on having anything to do with the Central States Pension Plan and frankly, I don't blame them.</p><p></p><p>They are intending to set up a totally independent separate one.</p><p></p><p>We would get whatever we have earned from Central States and whatever we earn from the new APWA once it's set up.</p><p></p><p>This is directly from the APWA.</p><p></p><p>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. </p><p></p><p>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.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ok2bclever, post: 55480"] 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 [B]is[/B] 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 [B]will[/B] 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. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
UPS EMPLOYEES START NEW UNION!
Top