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
Western conference fund %100 funded ?
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: 139324" data-attributes="member: 2189"><p>Actually nospin, I wasn't thinking of you so you threw yourself into that pot of water!</p><p><img src="/community/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/group1/lol.gif" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":lol:" title="Lol :lol:" data-shortname=":lol:" /> </p><p> </p><p>I understand your frustration and appreciate the effort. When I first read the link wildgoose posted I thought for a moment that the report of 100% funding was good and this may bode well but then my ears went up and I started thinking. IBT doesn't like it when we do this you know! <img src="/community/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/group1/wink.gif" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":wink:" title="Wink :wink:" data-shortname=":wink:" /> </p><p> </p><p>If the Western Fund is 100% or near 100% funded and with all the cries of upset going on across the declining membership why not raise the benefits to at least back to where they were. Think about it. Why not?</p><p> </p><p>With scary organ music in the background I now ask the all important question, do they know something lurks out there that they are not telling us? Also like CS, did they seize the contractual allocated healthcare increases and move them over into the pension side to help save the pension fund? Are they, like CS, buying current healthcare in 2006' soon to be 2007' with 2003' contract dollars? Like CS, did they give the individual employee the choice of either having this healthcare money reallocated or allowing the employee to know all the facts and what the situation is and then giving the employee a choice in reallocating some or all of his/her pay raise to cover such costs?</p><p> </p><p>Your comment of socialism is very close to the heart of the answer but it does boil down to the fact that the union preaches unity and brotherhood and we all share equally. Really! </p><p> </p><p>Well 2 question on that which get's to wildgoose's latest post with some good comments from him/her. (Don't know your gender goose so I didn't want to assume and offend)</p><p> </p><p>1) Why is it that some pension jurisdictions have a much better plan than others? OK, I'll be a good little communal citizen and throw in completely but let's not do this half-a#s. Let's go all the way. I'm now leader of the IBT and I have full and total control of the whole ball of wax. Starting immediately, all pension and healthcare funds will be collasped into one single plan and there will be a single payout for all based on years of service and age. All for one and one for all! No more CS, Western Fund, New England, or any of the smaller independent funds. You all be in the same and you will all get the same amount as currently paid out by CS or the Western fund or whichever is least.</p><p> </p><p>Now 2 things just happend. The first was a lot of rifle bolts slamming shut from the one's who come here and praise the good union pension as they are gonna shoot me. And you know what, I don't blame them at all. I'd do the same if them. Secondly, support for APWA just shot through the roof!<img src="/community/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/group1/lol.gif" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":lol:" title="Lol :lol:" data-shortname=":lol:" /> </p><p> </p><p>2) The second item gets to wildgoose's comments and that is, how can a union official sit there and claim unity and brotherhood and all that other BS and tell us, "we're with you all the way" when in many cases they themselves draw multiple pensions and enjoy other perks we likely don't even know about? Do I think they should be paid well for their services? If they are doing a good job, yes, absolutley. However, no union official, even the IBT President should never, ever draw a pension large than the largest monthly pension payout for the average Teamster member. If you want more in retirement as a union official, do like the rest of the collective that you claim to be apart of. Take some of your hard earned (I'm trying to give them the benefit of doubt here) weekly pay and get in the 401k or some other individual investment vehicle to add supplimental income to your retirement years.</p><p> </p><p>You want great pension plans for all union members that are secure and offer good payouts? The first place to start is a push by the membership to have that above about no official getting more than average member rule laid in stone in the union by-laws along with an end to multiple pension draws. If you move from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, then your credits move but again if there was only one plan then this practice would end now would it not! Maybe we just got a glimpse for one reason why there are so many differnt plans! </p><p> </p><p>Why TDU hasn't lead this charge more I've never understood and I wrote them about this back in the very early 90's along with one to Ron Carey. Ron did respond back with an "I Hear Ya!" but what changed? Nothing as I can see. Changed for the worse in our case. Hard to believe but there is one union effort I know of that in fact will do just this and it's APWA. Amazing how ahead of the curve these guys are in that respect. Van was way all over this already when I first talked to him over a year ago. </p><p> </p><p>Look, I know the report of near 100% funding for the Western fund is good and I know CS has had some improvement with the better stock market but also having taken our healthcare increases starting in 04' and will do so through the end of this current contract. This isn't some secret, it's on their website and in their quarterly magazine or you can call them and they will openly and forthrightly admit it on the phone. Oddly enough, CS just dramaticaly raised their pension payouts by about 40% but there's a catch. That 40% increase doesn't kick in for another 30 years. Lady at CS also explained this to me in detail on the phone. </p><p> </p><p>It all comes down to, what are the "devil in the details!"</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="wkmac, post: 139324, member: 2189"] Actually nospin, I wasn't thinking of you so you threw yourself into that pot of water! :lol: I understand your frustration and appreciate the effort. When I first read the link wildgoose posted I thought for a moment that the report of 100% funding was good and this may bode well but then my ears went up and I started thinking. IBT doesn't like it when we do this you know! :wink: If the Western Fund is 100% or near 100% funded and with all the cries of upset going on across the declining membership why not raise the benefits to at least back to where they were. Think about it. Why not? With scary organ music in the background I now ask the all important question, do they know something lurks out there that they are not telling us? Also like CS, did they seize the contractual allocated healthcare increases and move them over into the pension side to help save the pension fund? Are they, like CS, buying current healthcare in 2006' soon to be 2007' with 2003' contract dollars? Like CS, did they give the individual employee the choice of either having this healthcare money reallocated or allowing the employee to know all the facts and what the situation is and then giving the employee a choice in reallocating some or all of his/her pay raise to cover such costs? Your comment of socialism is very close to the heart of the answer but it does boil down to the fact that the union preaches unity and brotherhood and we all share equally. Really! Well 2 question on that which get's to wildgoose's latest post with some good comments from him/her. (Don't know your gender goose so I didn't want to assume and offend) 1) Why is it that some pension jurisdictions have a much better plan than others? OK, I'll be a good little communal citizen and throw in completely but let's not do this half-a#s. Let's go all the way. I'm now leader of the IBT and I have full and total control of the whole ball of wax. Starting immediately, all pension and healthcare funds will be collasped into one single plan and there will be a single payout for all based on years of service and age. All for one and one for all! No more CS, Western Fund, New England, or any of the smaller independent funds. You all be in the same and you will all get the same amount as currently paid out by CS or the Western fund or whichever is least. Now 2 things just happend. The first was a lot of rifle bolts slamming shut from the one's who come here and praise the good union pension as they are gonna shoot me. And you know what, I don't blame them at all. I'd do the same if them. Secondly, support for APWA just shot through the roof!:lol: 2) The second item gets to wildgoose's comments and that is, how can a union official sit there and claim unity and brotherhood and all that other BS and tell us, "we're with you all the way" when in many cases they themselves draw multiple pensions and enjoy other perks we likely don't even know about? Do I think they should be paid well for their services? If they are doing a good job, yes, absolutley. However, no union official, even the IBT President should never, ever draw a pension large than the largest monthly pension payout for the average Teamster member. If you want more in retirement as a union official, do like the rest of the collective that you claim to be apart of. Take some of your hard earned (I'm trying to give them the benefit of doubt here) weekly pay and get in the 401k or some other individual investment vehicle to add supplimental income to your retirement years. You want great pension plans for all union members that are secure and offer good payouts? The first place to start is a push by the membership to have that above about no official getting more than average member rule laid in stone in the union by-laws along with an end to multiple pension draws. If you move from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, then your credits move but again if there was only one plan then this practice would end now would it not! Maybe we just got a glimpse for one reason why there are so many differnt plans! Why TDU hasn't lead this charge more I've never understood and I wrote them about this back in the very early 90's along with one to Ron Carey. Ron did respond back with an "I Hear Ya!" but what changed? Nothing as I can see. Changed for the worse in our case. Hard to believe but there is one union effort I know of that in fact will do just this and it's APWA. Amazing how ahead of the curve these guys are in that respect. Van was way all over this already when I first talked to him over a year ago. Look, I know the report of near 100% funding for the Western fund is good and I know CS has had some improvement with the better stock market but also having taken our healthcare increases starting in 04' and will do so through the end of this current contract. This isn't some secret, it's on their website and in their quarterly magazine or you can call them and they will openly and forthrightly admit it on the phone. Oddly enough, CS just dramaticaly raised their pension payouts by about 40% but there's a catch. That 40% increase doesn't kick in for another 30 years. Lady at CS also explained this to me in detail on the phone. It all comes down to, what are the "devil in the details!" [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Retirement Topics
Western conference fund %100 funded ?
Top